RH9 Will not install

[Bladez]

OK I have taken an old K6/2 @ 350Mhz and would like to run RH on it. When the CD loads, anaconda starts, but immediately shuts down with a signal 11, whatever that is.

Mandrake also does the same thing... it will not load in either text or graphical.

System specs are:

AMD K6/2 @ 350
64mb SDRAM
4.3gb Seagate HDD
TEAC 32x CD-Rom
Diamond Viper V330 (AGP)
3Com 30509C NIC
TEAC Floppy.

Any ideas?

[synecdoche]

I am not sure if this will apply to your particular situation but I had trouble installing both RH and Mandrake because I had PnP enabled in my BIOS. Check if it is enabled, and if it is, turn it off and see if that helps.

If it doesn't, I don't know, but I'm just a greenhorn. :)

[CaptainPinko]

to not answer your question but i hope you aren't planning to run KDE or GNOME on that machine. i use rh8 on my p100 w/ 32 mb ram but thats a file server. if plan on have a gui on it you want to look at a lighter distro (tho rh9 might have included a few lighter (eg. *box) window managers for you to use... you might want to take a look at a thread called "why blackbox?" it'll just give you a little heads up....


sorry about your problems , just thought you should be forewarned

[bosox79]

Originally posted by Bladez
OK I have taken an old K6/2 @ 350Mhz and would like to run RH on it. When the CD loads, anaconda starts, but immediately shuts down with a signal 11, whatever that is.

Mandrake also does the same thing... it will not load in either text or graphical.

System specs are:

AMD K6/2 @ 350
64mb SDRAM
4.3gb Seagate HDD
TEAC 32x CD-Rom
Diamond Viper V330 (AGP)
3Com 30509C NIC
TEAC Floppy.

Any ideas?

It sounds to me like you are having a hardware compatibility problem. specially a memory problem . I have found from my personal experience that RH 9 prefers systems with 128MB of Ram. did you run a media check on your install cd's ? do you have onboard sound enabled? if so you may want to disable that! you may also want to try a less resource intensive distro i.e. Debian. or try adding more ram to the box. I would also take a look at this link for more help & info http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-9-Manual/install-guide/trouble.htm
l

[Bladez]

I appreciate the help, I managed to find out that the CD-rom drive was bad. It would error our trying to read any disc. I replaced the drive and it seems to be fine now. I did add another 32mb of ram to it as well. So far so good, THANK YOU ALL! :)

[bosox79]

Originally posted by Bladez
I appreciate the help, I managed to find out that the CD-rom drive was bad. It would error our trying to read any disc. I replaced the drive and it seems to be fine now. I did add another 32mb of ram to it as well. So far so good, THANK YOU ALL! :)

Glad I could offer some help:D

your welcome

[m00s3]

Originally posted by CaptainPinko
to not answer your question but i hope you aren't planning to run KDE or GNOME on that machine. i use rh8 on my p100 w/ 32 mb ram but thats a file server. if plan on have a gui on it you want to look at a lighter distro (tho rh9 might have included a few lighter (eg. *box) window managers for you to use... you might want to take a look at a thread called "why blackbox?" it'll just give you a little heads up....


sorry about your problems , just thought you should be forewarned
i have a p2-350 with 256mb of ram that runs slackware and kde quite well.. but then again the 512k cache on the p2 allways seemed to make it run quite well

[Bladez]

Ye the 96mb or ram is not enough, and the proc is slow, but this is just a machine to lplay with. Eventually I will add a swappable HDD rack to my main machine and just alternate between Linux and Winblows.

[CaptainPinko]

Originally posted by m00s3
i have a p2-350 with 256mb of ram that runs slackware and kde quite well.. but then again the 512k cache on the p2 allways seemed to make it run quite well

not to mention the RAM probably helps. i'm running Yellow Dog 3.0 (ie. Red Hat 8 on PPC) on a 333 MHz G3 (this is like a 600 Mhz Intel or so) w/ 64 Mb of RAM and it CRAWLS. The noise of the swap being used is awful. So i'm guessing its mostly your ram though the cache wouldn't hurt either, buffering and all.