Link to home
Create AccountLog in
Avatar of CPUAffinity
CPUAffinityFlag for United States of America

asked on

Need Fedora 5 or 6

I'm trying to find an older version of Fedora that will work with a P3 650 MHz Gateway laptop for donation.  The unit has a Win 98 sticker which obviously no one wants.  I've looked high & low & can not find a straight link to an ISO.  Can someone help me & send a link to download an ISO of Fedora 5 or 6?
Thanks!
Avatar of CPUAffinity
CPUAffinity
Flag of United States of America image

ASKER

Actually, it doesn't have to be Fedora.  Any major disto is fine.. I don't know how far back Ubuntu goes, but 10 & 9 don't work.  Also, the link has to be to an ISO for CD.  These laptops don't have a DVD capable drive.
Fedora 5 and 6 were called Fedora Core 5 and 6. You will find them here on these mirrors:
http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/publiclist/Fedora/5/
http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/publiclist/Fedora/6/
Avatar of Kerem ERSOY
Kerem ERSOY

Hi,

Why should it be an ancient version? Any i386 version should run with iti. But instead you can go for xubuntu or Net-book Remix release of Ubuntu. They are smaller footprint versions of ubuntu..

If they won't work with your notebook it might be either a Hardware Problem such as faulty CD-Rom Drive or some hardware incompatibility issue. I've seen such older systems which refuse to boot from an external CD unless it was attached through a port replicator which would render your install operation useless.

Please send more details about your system.

Cheers,
K.
BUT:
If you are just looking for an OS to fit older hardware, then there are far better ways than using an outdated OS.

Go to distrowatch ( www.distrowatch.com ) and check out the following OS'es:
Puppy Linux
Vector Linux
AntiX
Lubuntu
Fluxbuntu
TinyMe
The first 2 only lead me to an FTP directory structure w/ no ISO I can find.  I tried those earlier.  The 2nd link is currently downloading & I'll keep you posted.  Was I missing the ISO from the 1st two?
It is normal that you can't find them anymore because they are dropped off from support long ago. When and OS is in EOL phase it wont be copied over mirrors anymore.

So it is not a correct way try to find them. You'd better test your system booting from a Live CD version such as Ubuntu.

To install from an obsolete version will create more problems than benefits. If you decide to install even a single program you will not find any repositories to download it etc.
I tried Fedora 11 & 9, then Ubuntu 10.  Both fail.  Fedora made it further.  I figured I'd try one Red Hat distro & one Debian.  Since the newer failed, I thought I'd try an older.  I should have mentioned that I have 2 identical units.  All three versions failed on both.  Both currently have XP, but those licenses don't belong to me to give away with the laptops.
@torimar:
I wanted something a bit more user friendly.  That's why I thought I should stick with the more popular distros.  Definitely want something with a software center or yum on them.  I've never installed any aside from Red Had, Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, or Mandrake.
>> "The first 2 only lead me to an FTP directory structure w/ no ISO I can find.  I tried those earlier. "

You need to click the "Fedora Archive" link, then navigate the structure accordingly:
fedora > linux > core > 6 > i386 > iso


The problem with old hardware usually is the processor architecture. I found that many Linux distros with a small enough footprint to run on low profile hardware still are optimized for i586 processors or above and will not work on older processors.
The distros I listed are specialists in supporting old hardware.

On my own old PC bought in 1998 I used to run "AntiX". But Vector and Puppy have a very good reputation.
SOLUTION
Avatar of Kerem ERSOY
Kerem ERSOY

Link to home
membership
Create an account to see this answer
Signing up is free. No credit card required.
Create Account
>> "I wanted something a bit more user friendly.  That's why I thought I should stick with the more popular distros.  Definitely want something with a software center or yum on them.  I've never installed any aside from Red Had, Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, or Mandrake."

Who says they are not user-friendly? A modern distro is certainly a lot more user-friendly than an 8 year old fossil.
Almost all of these distros come with live CDs. So you can boot off the life CD to test how well they support your hardware out of the box, and how much you like them.
@torimar:
lol, not sure how I missed that.  Thanks!

@KeremE:
The CD drive is locally attached.  No docking station or external anything.  They are Gateway Solo 5300 laptops.  They failed at different points each time.  I'm in no way a Linux expert.  Wish I could tell you more.  

It looks like Fedora 6 is stuck at the 1st next button of the install process.
It's at the Fedora splash screen.  The mouse moves, but no reaction when I hit next... even after a few minutes since these are super slow.
>> They failed at different points each time.
>> It looks like Fedora 6 is stuck at the 1st next button of the install process.

That's why I suggest to use a live medium for a first test run.
Should there be any problem with your hardware detection, the live CD won't run either.

And please take into account that using an outdated OS will not really make it easier. It will, on the contrary, make it more difficult to troubleshoot because there is no live support any more and no user community.
Everything I've tried so far was a live CD aside from Fedora 6.  Fedora 11 was the only one to fully boot into the live environment, but the install failed with disk lock errors during the partitioning.  I could try that CD again to give you the specifics if you'd like.
torimar:
Looks like you might be right.  I tried Ubuntu 10.10 again, and this time its made it much further.  Not a big deal to answer, but if you know, when did PATA drives started being listed as sda like SATA & SCSI?
I did not mean "any" live CDs, I meant the ones pertaining to known old-hardware specialist distros, like the ones in the list I posted.

The fact that Fedora 11 worked in live mode would let one expect it fully supports your hardware - although this isn't quite true by necessity: the live mode's kernel hw support is somewhat restricted as compared to an actual installation.

If you want, you could try and use the Fedora 11 Live CD (or the Parted Magic CD: www.partedmagic.com) in order to pre-format and partition the HDD, then try installing into those preformatted partitions.
But even Fedora 11 is not a very good option if you could run a current, up-to-date and maintained distro instead.

If I were to do this, I shouldn't start tweaking or fumbling until I can be certain that *none* of the specialist distros I mentioned will work out of the box. Sometimes you have to try a couple distros until you hit the one that gets along excellently with a system; I find this often goes for new hardware, too.
I hadn't seen your post when submitting, sorry.

PATA is just another denomination for the old EIDE. To my knowledge, they have always been listed as 'hda' in Linux, and still are.


Even if Ubuntu 10.10 should install, you will see the system suffering from major lag. Can't imagine that the usability and fun factor will be high.
PATA direves are always listed as  /dev/hdx not /dev/sdx.

Please start the Ubuntu live and run memetest first. I don't think this is an issue with the disks.
I install Linux (Ubuntu or Fedora) on all of our old equipment we donate, all PATA drives.  the last 11, including these, both PC and Laptops - Gateway/Compaq/HP/Dell have all listed the PATA drives as sda... this is why I asked.  I found it odd, but not enough to research.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
Create an account to see this answer
Signing up is free. No credit card required.
Create Account
lubuntu is downloading & I will try it on the other system to compare side-by-side.  The Ubuntu 10.10 install is still running on one of the laptops.
In fact only SATA/SCSI/SAS drives would be detected as sdx and the IDE/EIDE drives would be detected hdx. You should be mistaken. I've never met any PATA drive detected as sdx before.
I'll post a screenshot for you on the Lubuntu install since we know these systems are PATA.
Also, I could see being mistaken - but this was on 9 consecutive systems in one day, and these two laptops today... that would be hard to misread that many times.  I'll let you know what I see.
Here is a shot from the Ubuntu 10.10 System Monitor - File Systems tab.  These are P3 651 MHz systems predating SATA if I'm not mistaken.
IMG-1419.JPG
IMG-1421.JPG
IMG-1423.JPG
So Ubuntu 10.10 installed just fine (obviously from my last comment).  Lubuntu is in progress.  Thanks to you both.  We'll see how Lubuntu does & compare.
In fact you won't need ext4 this is an overkill for these small drives. You'd better stick with EXT3 when you format it next time.
And I've found this in UBUNTU Forums. So this is why your drivers were detected as SATA. Actually I've not seen and PATA dirves in none of my systems recently. So my observation comes from the old times when PATA was in use.

http://ubuntu-utah.ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=3140783&postcount=8

Please read other comments too they state that other linux distros have a similar way of detecting. This should not create a problem for you.

But Avois using EXT4 it requires more directory space.
Good to know.  Will do when I try LUbuntu.
Something must be wrong with the CD-ROM on one of the systems as suggested by KeremE.  After the successful install on one of the systems, I flipped the CD-ROM drives & the install worked fine on the 2nd unit.  Ubuntu 10.10 works well on the one unit, but Lubuntu is much faster.  Thanks for the heads up.  I'd never heard of it before.  Thank you both for all the help.