Results 1 to 10 of 12
Hi Each I found my way to this forum for some advice and assistance. The story so far ! I installed Peppermint os on two laptops and on my Desktop ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
- 03-13-2012 #1
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
machine won't allow Linux installation
I found my way to this forum for some advice and assistance.
The story so far !
I installed Peppermint os on two laptops and on my Desktop PC the first two as the sole os and the last as a dual boot.
I was so delighted with the linus os which installed and works perfectly on these machines I proudly boasted to my daughter that I could reinvigorate her old Packard Bell iGo bu installing the same on hers.
I doubled the Ram to 500 from 250 and proceded to install.
Would not install on top of Win XP so I removed it completely.
Still would not install !
Made a new Peppermintos CD and checksumed to make sure copy was good.
Still would not load
Decided to try a different version so created a Fedora Cd and after an initial promising start it reported "something is wrong install failed"
Could anyone throw a light on why this particular machine refuses to install Linux.
Many thanks in eager anticipation.
- 03-13-2012 #2
What are specs of the machine?
Are you getting a specific error message?
Fedora (and Ubuntu or anything running Gnome or KDE) will not like that RAM level.
You could have a dirty or dying CD ROM drive.
You could have a bad stick of memory - does the CD have a memcheck (or memtest) option? If so, try leaving that running for a few hours.
Sometimes CDs or DVDs burnt on one drive will not work in another; I have no idea why but it is so. You could try creating the CD on a different machine.
Maybe the graphics card in the machine is not liked out of the box. Sometimes, in the *buntu world the alternate install CD will work where the Live CD won't. In such cases it is usually because the live CD didn't like the graphics card. I don't know if Fedora or Peppermint have something similar.
Just a few thoughts for you.
- 03-14-2012 #3
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
Thanks for the reply but,
I have Peppermint running on an older IBM THinkpad ok which is a lower spec.
I loaded WIN XP + Service Pack using the DVD/CD drive ok so cannot see the drive being faulty
What is "the alternate install CD" ?
Any other ideas Folks
- 05-02-2012 #4
- Join Date
- Apr 2012
- Vancouver, WA
I have an older laptop as well as an older desktop that I wanted to install linux on. I tried many different distros (Fedora, Mandriva, Suse, Ubuntu, etc) The laptop only has 256 MB and the desktop 512MB. Most of these operating systems require more resources to run. Ubuntu did run on the desktop but very slowly. Lubuntu is the only one I found would run properly (when I say properly I mean great) on either computer. Before I installed the operating systems I did format the drive for Linux with Ultimate Boot disk. I don't know if that step is really necessary, I believe the linux installation cd will format the disk for you. The main point is for older pc's with low resources lubuntu is a good choice.
- 05-02-2012 #5
Most of the better popular Linux distros have hardware compatibility lists on their web sites that give you a chance to see if their distro will work on your computer. Here, for example, is Ubuntu's "certified hardware" listing. All the better distros have such listings. I would start there.
- 05-19-2012 #6
For low resource computers, AntiX, Crunchbang, and Puppy are good choices. You could also try tiny core, SliTaz or legacyos.Registered Linux user #526930
- 05-19-2012 #7
My "Linux mentor" and I toyed with an awesome little distro called SalixOS that worked wonderfully on this old very-low-resource Dell. It comes in a couple of fine flavors, LXDE and Xfce. Very fast, very sleek. Fun to experiment with, and just about as easy to install and set up (for this little newbie at least) as Xubuntu!
- 05-21-2012 #8
- 05-21-2012 #9
- Join Date
- Apr 2012
hmmmmmmmm two distros to go for are zenwalk and vector...... suit your old kit fine.
I use both.........used almost them all arch, puppy etc...... but really those two are the best and stable ,,,,,,,,also they are simplicity in itself and they both find your wireless modem in seconds......infact they just gave me the choice of where i wanted to log on to.....
also what no one has mentioned ..Puppy is great at runs so well.........but it only has heart for sofware that it calls pets......namely software that it has doctored to suit its system.. dont go there. its hard work to expand this distro.Also I have never had agreeable success with hard drive installation.
Honestly ZEN or Vector are the leaders with small hardware requirements and run brilliantly
if you get stuck installing email me.........email@example.com
when i first got involved with puters....... hundreds of years ago hehe speccies and amstrads.... we all tried to write so much into so small amount of memory...is i
There was a fella called Jeff minter he was a ground breaker used the screen memory maps etc to write games. Brilliant...that is where I see puppy..... but its not needed today when most people even if its an old puter...... have a reasonable hard drive and memory..
and that is what puppy is......... its just using memory.. its not a full blown system as such...
stay away from major distros......... coz they are going down he windows route namely Ububtu...........slow and heck its dvd couldnt even find my firmware for my modem. yet...........they lite version did........ so we can safely say Ubuntu is trying to take on windows and mac......but is leaving fundementals behind.. If i behonest........ I have never seen a fast version of ubuntu....... but have to say lubunto is the best and impressive and I shall play with it more..... Well it found my wireless in seconds and the full package couldnt find my modem hmmm.
Last edited by welsh_wizard_98; 05-21-2012 at 10:15 PM. Reason: further info
- 05-24-2012 #10
Hard drive test is in order -- bad sectors determined.
Athlon 1500+, 20GB hdd -- correct?
System Rescue CD is a place to start. Did you use dd if=/dev/zero . . . command?