peRplEXeD: What do these terms mean?

[nweissma]

Jeez Chris'! is someone supposed to undertstand this??
re the attachment: what is i586, i686, .iso.asc, .iso.md5, .iso.torrent, x86_64 [isn't "x86" and "64" a contradiction in terms??]... how are these permutations different? how do i decide what i should want or can have?

[oz]

Some of it is answered in this thread:

http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/per...a64-em64t.html

The md5 checksums are somewhat covered here:

http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/ins...ll-cd-dvd.html

Linux glossaries are a good way to look up some terms:

Computing Linux Unix Glossary

Just google linux glossary for some different glossaries.

[D-cat]

Those who live their life on the net learn these extensions quickly.

ix86 is referencing the processor the binary was compiled on/for. "i" means Intel compatible set, the x86 architecture for what level of processor is required to run it, anywhere for 386 to 686. The 386 binaries are the most compatible but also the slowest since they don't use any modern Pentium instruction enhancements. The 586 binaries will run on a basic Pentium computer, while the 686 ones require a modern processor. All the aforementioned types are 32 bit.

Thus then comes the x86_64, which means these binaries also use the x86 instruction set, but require a 64 bit processor.

All the previous are usually mentioned in either .deb or .rpm files. These are installer archives; you can think of them like zip files that include extra information about what's inside and what else is required to make the contained binaries run correctly. This helps a Linux installation maintain a stable environment. SuSE uses RPM.

.iso is a standard CD-ROM image file that follows the iso9660 standard at minimum.

.md5 is a checksum file. You use it to verify that a large file you downloaded is correct bit-for-bit.

.torrent is a bit-torrent definition file. Bit-torrent is a p2p file sharing application, similar to Kazaa and Emule, only other users have to intentionally share the individual files. It includes information about the file name, size, hash (so it only gets the correct file), and the default tracker servers that help locate other users who are sharing. Torrents can do distributed downloading which eases the bandwidth usage on official servers and can potentially acquire the file faster than a direct download (depending on the number of users sharing and your connection).

.

Since you're running Vista, I'll assume you have an x86 processor. The only question then is if you download the i586.iso or the x86_64.iso . I don't know what you have for a processor, but I'd suggest the i586 only because it is more guaranteed compatible. You can also just download the LiveCD so you can test the environment without making any changes to the computer. Note that LiveCD's run slower than installed environments.

When you finish downloading, make sure you burn the DVD as an image to disc, not master a data DVD. Otherwise the disc will not be bootable.

[MikeTbob]

Your other post was deleted as a duplicate, please continue the discussion here only. Duplicate posting is not allowed, thanks.

[nweissma]

Those who live their life on the net learn these extensions quickly.

ix86 is referencing the processor the binary was compiled on/for. "i" means Intel compatible set, the x86 architecture for what level of processor is required to run it, anywhere for 386 to 686. The 386 binaries are the most compatible but also the slowest since they don't use any modern Pentium instruction enhancements. The 586 binaries will run on a basic Pentium computer, while the 686 ones require a modern processor. All the aforementioned types are 32 bit.

Thus then comes the x86_64, which means these binaries also use the x86 instruction set, but require a 64 bit processor.

All the previous are usually mentioned in either .deb or .rpm files. These are installer archives; you can think of them like zip files that include extra information about what's inside and what else is required to make the contained binaries run correctly. This helps a Linux installation maintain a stable environment. SuSE uses RPM.

.iso is a standard CD-ROM image file that follows the iso9660 standard at minimum.

.md5 is a checksum file. You use it to verify that a large file you downloaded is correct bit-for-bit.

.torrent is a bit-torrent definition file. Bit-torrent is a p2p file sharing application, similar to Kazaa and Emule, only other users have to intentionally share the individual files. It includes information about the file name, size, hash (so it only gets the correct file), and the default tracker servers that help locate other users who are sharing. Torrents can do distributed downloading which eases the bandwidth usage on official servers and can potentially acquire the file faster than a direct download (depending on the number of users sharing and your connection).

.

Since you're running Vista, I'll assume you have an x86 processor. The only question then is if you download the i586.iso or the x86_64.iso . I don't know what you have for a processor, but I'd suggest the i586 only because it is more guaranteed compatible. You can also just download the LiveCD so you can test the environment without making any changes to the computer. Note that LiveCD's run slower than installed environments.

When you finish downloading, make sure you burn the DVD as an image to disc, not master a data DVD. Otherwise the disc will not be bootable.

I have Intel E6400 which is a 64 bit processor, so i infer that i can download an i686(?) version.

i will read the proffered links.. but my experience with these educational pages is that they explain an enigma ito a conundrum. This is exasperating if one is pursuing this alone; is there a chance that you might know someone in new york city who is willing to hobnob with an affable, and otherwise intelligent, baFFLed newbie?

why .iso without .md5? jeez!!!-- you talk about the servers getting hammered -- I'm being hammered.

[D-cat]

I have Intel E6400 which is a 64 bit processor, so i infer that i can download an i686(?) version.

You can get the x86_64 or the i586 iso (or i686 LiveCD), it shouldn't much matter. I think he ix86 installs are still marginally more stable than the x86_64, but I'm not so sure anymore; those here who use the 64 bit builds regularly would know better.

why .iso without .md5?

The .md5 file is a small text file that has hash info to verify the iso of the same name. You are welcome to download it as well and use a md5 program (like fsum) to verify it, but as a Windows user, you might find it more trouble than it's worth (another program to find, download, install, and figure out how to use). The .iso file is the one that contains the data to burn the disc.

I don't personally know anyone in NYC who can help with the install, but you can try to look up a Linux User Group (LUG) in your area that may have some members who would likely be willing to give some one on one guidance. Good luck with that (not sarcastic).

[nweissma]

You can get the x86_64 or the i586 iso (or i686 LiveCD), it shouldn't much matter. I think he ix86 installs are still marginally more stable than the x86_64, but I'm not so sure anymore; those here who use the 64 bit builds regularly would know better.

whom do you suggest?

The .md5 file is a small text file that has hash info to verify the iso of the same name. You are welcome to download it as well and use a md5 program (like fsum) to verify it, but as a Windows user, you might find it more trouble than it's worth (another program to find, download, install, and figure out how to use). The .iso file is the one that contains the data to burn the disc.

so why would i not want to use the .md5 download version? can i use the md5 algorithm on a download not .md5? and what is the .asc download?

I don't personally know anyone in NYC who can help with the install, but you can try to look up a Linux User Group (LUG) in your area that may have some members who would likely be willing to give some one on one guidance. Good luck with that (not sarcastic).

Good Luck is right: i attended one of the LUG meetings -- worthless crap!! By and for dirtbags. i can't understand why, in a city of 20 million people, i can't find even one with technical expertise....

[D-cat]

whom do you suggest?

What do you want to do? If you want to test drive it, get the i686 live CD iso. If you want to jump in with a full install, i suggest you download the i586 DVD iso.

so why would i not want to use the .md5 download version? can i use the md5 algorithm on a download not .md5? and what is the .asc download?

I'm not sure I understand the question. The .md5 is not any download version, it's just a small text file with a hash that can be used to verify the file integrity if you have an md5 program installed on your computer. It's worthless without the iso anyway. You're still welcome to it, if you want that extra assurence that the iso download was successful.

The .asc (short for ascii) is also a small text file. This is typically just a description of the same named iso file.

Good Luck is right: i attended one of the LUG meetings -- worthless crap!! By and for dirtbags. i can't understand why, in a city of 20 million people, i can't find even one with technical expertise....

You know, this is the second time I've heard that about a LUG, and they're really not supposed to be like that. I'm sorry about your experience, it's a disservice to the community as a whole. Most of us at this site prefer to be as helpful as possible, but I also understand the difficulty in not being able to just call over you friendly neighborhood geek.

I'm sure there's several people in the city with some degree of Linux knowledge. It's also the NorthEast US, so getting help fast friendly and free is like looking for a needle in a haystack outdoors in a hurricaine. This may be the slow way, but we'll try best we can.

[nweissma]

the second time?? something's wrong because this nyc meeting was egregious. i waited a month. scheduled to start at 8pm; started at 8:40. i arrived at 7:30 ==> waiting in the lobby for > 1 hour. i went there exclusively for technical help with ubuntu installation and background. the douchebags who sponsored the meeting either had NO technical ability or they pretended not to.

[gogalthorp]

Hmm seems like there are a lot of groups in NYC

New York City Area Linux/Open-Source User Groups