Find the answer to your Linux question:
Results 1 to 3 of 3
Hello all, Despite the advent of Fedora, I was going to download and install the somewhat dated RedHat 9. My direct questions is this. Some mirrors list the following for ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    8

    redhat9 disc1 ISO size discrepency


    Hello all,

    Despite the advent of Fedora, I was going to download and install the somewhat dated RedHat 9. My direct questions is this.

    Some mirrors list the following for the ISO files to download:
    Code:
    03/14/2003 12:00AM    668,991,488 shrike-i386-disc1.iso
    03/14/2003 12:00AM    677,511,168 shrike-i386-disc2.iso
    03/14/2003 12:00AM    508,592,128 shrike-i386-disc3.iso
    Whereas others list this:
    Code:
    09/03/2003 12:00AM    669,122,560 shrike-i386-disc1.iso
    03/14/2003 12:00AM    677,511,168 shrike-i386-disc2.iso
    03/14/2003 12:00AM    508,592,128 shrike-i386-disc3.iso
    Notice that the size and date of disc 1 is a little different. Does anyone know why this would be? Discs 2 and 3 are always the same, but was there a problem with the original disc1 and some mirrors just didn't update? Or should I be wary of the newer "modified" file?

    I was surprised to not find much about this by doing a google search. As an additional point, if anyone feels like trying to sell me on Fedora, Mandrake, Suse, Debian, or something else, feel free, but I am really hoping for a definitive answer to my question...

    TIA,
    harry349

  2. #2
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    130
    There shouldn't be a problem at all. Check the dates, and you will se that
    they differ, which means that

    03/14/2003 12:00AM 668,991,488 shrike-i386-disc1.iso
    (from first list)
    was created earlier than
    09/03/2003 12:00AM 669,122,560 shrike-i386-disc1.iso
    (from the other list)

    That simply means that between 03/14/2003 and 09/03/2003 they made changes to certain programs or files, that only affected disc 1.
    In short, I would use the most recent iso file.

    /ooop

  3. #3
    Linux Engineer
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Knoxhell, TN
    Posts
    1,078
    if you look at the time stamp, the larger of the two versions is about 6mos newer than the other one.. to me that would suggest a bugfix/update that didn't quite make it to all the mirrors... if you're in doubt, look for the md5 sums on the mirror as well and check them when you d/l the ISO
    Their code will be beautiful, even if their desks are buried in 3 feet of crap. - esr

  4. $spacer_open
    $spacer_close

Posting Permissions

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