Fedora Linux Support Community & Resources Center
  #1  
Old 1st July 2009, 10:46 PM
CharlieGlenn Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12
Which Version Of Fedora 11 To Install?

I'm a bit confused about which version I should install on my computer. In 2001 I built the computer I'm using now. It has an AMD Athlon 1.2 GHZ CPU so it's an IBM compatible computer.

I burned the i686 Live CD of Fedora 11. It does load on my computer but it takes about 25 minutes to get into the desktop. The 386 version has no Live CD or I would have burned the 386 version instead. I've had no problems using the 386 version of other linux distros on my computer and I doubt I'd have any problems using the 386 version of Fedora 11 on my computer.

I don't understand what an i686 is. Is it like a 386 or a 586? Is it for a 64 bit CPU or is it for a late model 32 bit CPU?

So, which version should I run on my computer? The i686 or the 386 version? Thanks for any help.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 1st July 2009, 11:14 PM
pete_1967
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Yours is i686, your problem is more likely related to amount of RAM, CD ROM speed and/ or network connection you have.

When you boot and the progress bar shows up, hit 'Esc' and you can watch boot process. Pay attention on where it hangs.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 2nd July 2009, 12:42 AM
CharlieGlenn Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12
Hi pete 1967 thanks for the help. I suppose it could be the RAM. I have only 256 megs of RAM. I have a 20X DVD burner and an ISDN internet connection.

I'll pop some pop corn and watch the text go by.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 2nd July 2009, 03:32 AM
CharlieGlenn Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12
Ok, it looks like the problem is I don't have enough RAM. I think it's time for me to buy a new motherboard, 64 bit dual processor and DDR2 memory.

Only 2 distros I like still work with my ancient ATI card at 1280 x 1024 and I'm still using PATA hard drives.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 2nd July 2009, 03:34 AM
Demz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
i'd use the LiveCD to test it on your hardware first, you can install from LiveCD anyway but i would wait for F12, F11 just has to many problems with it
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 2nd July 2009, 03:49 AM
CharlieGlenn Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12
Hi DEMZ, I did use the Live CD of Fedora 11 i686 to test my hardware. I guess all the new versions of every disrto have problems. With Ubuntu I won't install their .04 version anymore. I wait for the .10 version.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 2nd July 2009, 03:56 AM
Demz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
i dunno how stable 9.10 will be if there gonna use Grub2 as default,
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 2nd July 2009, 06:02 AM
CharlieGlenn Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12
Why? What's wrong with GRUB 2? Ever get the feeling some distros move too fast?

Not as slow as Debian but not as fast as Ubuntu. That sounds just about right.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 2nd July 2009, 10:11 AM
Demz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Grub2 isnt exactly ready prime time, kinda why i dont think why Fedora will use it in F12, it still needs work done to it, i thiink there looking to use Grub2 in F13 . i think Debain maybe using Grub2 in Squeeze release im not sure, but if Ubuntu uses Grub2 in 9.10 Mint8 will use it
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 2nd July 2009, 10:16 AM
markkuk Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 5,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGlenn View Post
I don't understand what an i686 is. Is it like a 386 or a 586? Is it for a 64 bit CPU or is it for a late model 32 bit CPU?
See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_P...rchitecture%29
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 2nd July 2009, 12:38 PM
RalphCC Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London UK
Posts: 142
Hardware retention

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGlenn View Post
Ok, it looks like the problem is I don't have enough RAM. I think it's time for me to buy a new motherboard, 64 bit dual processor and DDR2 memory.

Only 2 distros I like still work with my ancient ATI card at 1280 x 1024 and I'm still using PATA hard drives.
Yout PATA disks will be fine and also your ATI card on a new motherboard. I am still using similar for F11 & more than two linux dists work if you check the display config.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 2nd July 2009, 08:58 PM
CharlieGlenn Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12
DEMZ may be by November 3 2009, which is when Fedora 12 will be released, Grub2 will be working ok. I'm still trying to figure out how to use PulseAudio. I don't mind being on the cutting edge as long as I don't need a band-aid.


markkuk thanks for the link. Now I understand what the difference is.


RalphCC I have no idea how to check a display config. I'm one of those point-and-click kind of people. I've been using Linux for 2 years now and if you asked me how to do this or that at the CL I have no idea.

I know PCLOS and Puppy are still using the old ATI driver because I've been using them since last year. I have the latest versions of both but it was a shock when Ubuntu dropped support for the old driver I need.

I've tried most of the distros in the top 30 at DistroWatch. Right now I'm using PCLOS Gnome 2009.1 for GIMP because I can do 1280 x 1024 and that's a great resolution for computer art. On a second hard drive I'm using Ubuntu Studio 9.04 because it has an rt kernel. I need an rt kernel for writing music with Rosegarden and other midi software. PCLOS doesn't have an rt kernel for 2009 yet.

I don't know if Fedora has an rt kernel or if it can do the 1280 x 1024 res. In 2 years I've never found just one distro that can do all the things I need to do. Linux seems to still be more business oriented. People do more with computers then just type letters or use spreadsheets.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 3rd July 2009, 11:03 AM
RalphCC Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London UK
Posts: 142
Config

All I was suggexting was look at system>admin>display and system>pref etc from the top bar. You should be able to set the display dimensions you want. I just call it config out of habit rather than need, so it should be like windows. I have a similar ATI card on this machine and I have been using a lower res. so just try it.
I didn't know what the basis of liking particular versions was.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
fedora, install, version

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
install core version Fedora 11 JV.com Installation, Upgrades and Live Media 1 8th September 2009 06:52 PM
Which Fedora to install - i386 or the 86-64 version? schu777 Hardware & Laptops 1 3rd March 2009 04:22 PM
Possible to install SCIM in Fedora 10 (KDE version?) lazylogic Using Fedora 2 19th January 2009 12:40 AM
Fedora 7 LIVE CD version - Install? Streets Installation, Upgrades and Live Media 2 17th October 2007 07:13 AM
which fedora version should i install? theoldnyx Using Fedora 5 4th February 2007 04:36 PM


Current GMT-time: 22:52 (Sunday, 26-03-2017)

TopSubscribe to XML RSS for all Threads in all ForumsFedoraForumDotOrg Archive
logo

All trademarks, and forum posts in this site are property of their respective owner(s).
FedoraForum.org is privately owned and is not directly sponsored by the Fedora Project or Red Hat, Inc.

Privacy Policy | Term of Use | Posting Guidelines | Archive | Contact Us | Founding Members

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

FedoraForum is Powered by RedHat