Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1

    Bios. Cd drives. And Code 4.

    I'm new to linux... <-How many times have you heard that?

    Anyways.... to the meat and potatoes.

    I have two computers and I want to put linux on the older one. It is a 200Mhz P2 with 32megs of ram, and about 3.5 gigs of space on the HD.
    It currently doesn't have an OS other than the ambios. I have arklinux iso image burned on to a cd, and the installer kept failing, so i ended up killdisking the drive to put just linux on it.(It had windows 98 on it)

    I have the bios set to boot from the Cd drive but i keep getting code 4 (can't boot from cd) when putting it in and I can't even put windows back on. I need to know what setting in the bios to tweak so i can actually install Linux. Also, i don't care what distribution of linux i put on the computer as long as it actually goes on unlike arklinux. If you could tell me what a good beginner linux user distribution is... that'd be nice.


  2. #2
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Täby, Sweden
    Since arklinux is still alpha, you might want to consider some other distro of older vintage, like RH or Mdk. Of the two, I personally recommend RH, but that's individual. Try to boot it from the CD first, and if it doesn't work, then put it into your Winbloze machine and write a boot floppy. The floppy image is in the file /images/bootdisk.img on the CD. Use the Winbloze program /dosutils/rawrite.exe to write the image to a floppy. Then insert the CD and the floppy in the old machine and enjoy the show!

  3. #3
    i'll have to try it when i get home. the computer is windows 2k. i'll report how it goes later. thank you.

  4. $spacer_open
  5. #4
    its windows 2k, so the path you gave me isn't right :/
    i can't remember all of the dos command to do it though... it was like format a: and then some other command value to format in windows a boot disk.

  6. #5
    i'm a moron..... i forgot the other technicality.... there are like 5 isos for red hat linux.... averaging 650 megs each... that's 3.2 gigs.... will linux take up all that space?

  7. #6
    i'm still a beginner too... <-- there you go again! hah!

    assuming you haven't installed linux yet, you only need the first iso image to install linux. the other isos are source code, and more rpms, i gues. i haven't checked the other 2 yet. another assumption that you got the rh9 isos. there are only 3 isos that i know of at the rh site, where did you get the other 2? a 3.2 gig HD would do, but don't do full install. you need more than 5gs for that. a normal desktop would cost you 2gs+. i can't remember the exact size.

    if you downloaded the isos and burned it and it doesn't boot from CD, chances are you didn't put that i_forgot_the_name of the image file somwehere that is not in it's folder where you are supposed to get it.

    if you are saying that your mobo is quite old, then maybe it doesn't do boot from CD. check out the bios. if there is an option that says boot from CD, then i guess it's ok.

    as for win2k, i haven't tried that out yet. aren't windows identical? not literally, but they try to make it better in appearance but the same inside...

  8. #7
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Täby, Sweden
    If you can see five ISOs, then you're probably looking at RH8, and in that case, you should look away, since RH9 (which has three ISOs) is much better. As for RH8, you basically just need the first three ISOs; the last two are source. I think you need all three ISOs for RH9, but neither 8 nor 9 installs everything on them. It's just that that which it installs is rather scattered over all ISOs, so you're likely to need all of them. I believe it installed two or three packages from the last ISO when I installed RH9. That's not very smooth, but maybe they had their reasons.

    How do you mean that the path wasn't right? Where did it go wrong?

    And actually, xylex_blaiste, as much as I hate to admit this, Windowses are actually very different inside. The NT line (NT4,2000,XP) is built on a completely different kernel than the Win95 line (95,98,ME). The Win95 line has the most pathetic excuse for a kernel that has ever been invented. If you look at the technical specs, it actually looks as if they designed it to crash.
    The NT line is far more stable and mature. Of course, far more stable and mature than the 95 line doesn't really say very much; it still doesn't even come anywhere close to Linux. In any case, Win2K is also an enormous improvement to NT4. It's the greatest improvement that I've ever seen between two version of M$ products, only rivaled by the change between IE3 and IE4. Of course, the change between 2K and XP is essentially about looks, and nothing else.
    From what I can see, the next Winbloze version (Longhorn), is going for the same stuff right now; that is, only a few additional technical features, and a lot of change in worthless appearance. You know what? You can actually rotate windows in Longhorn. Amazing, isn't it?

  9. #8
    program files/dosutils/rawrite.exe
    not there :/
    rawrite.exe doesn't exist on this computer either... its a pretty recent install, so windows hasn't had that much time to delete itself either. :/
    supposedly on longhorn, they're redoing the filesystem again also.
    i'm getting nine now. but god these ftp servers are slow, and i can't get it over kazaa because its too popular of a download with all the windows users trying to escape windows... so, it'll be about tomorrow before i have the isos. :/

  10. #9
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Täby, Sweden
    No, I meant /dosutils/rawrite.exe on the CD. Windoze doesn't have this program or any equivalence, so it is provided with the distribution.

    Yeah, the FS was one of those minor things that I was referring to that would actually be a practical feature. The reason I think it is minor is because they'll be doing only small changes to the FS itself, they're basically just setting up a new interface to it. From what I've heard about it (which admittedly isn't very much), I am yet rather unimpressed.

  11. #10
    will it be on the redhat9 release? its not on arklinux :/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts