Linux RedHat on SATA 1

[tinkertech]

I am installing Linux RedHat 9.0 on a dual HDD SATA system. I fear I may have some problems with the installation and wanted to check with this site if anyone had ever done this install and if any problems were incountered? Is the setup of RedHat will be as simple as it was with a regular ATA HDD?

If at first you don't succeed, reboot!

 

[TrojanWarBlade]

Why use RedHat 9.0?
What's wrong with Fedora Core 3 or 4?
I'm running Sata with FC3 no problem at all.


Trojan.

 

[thedaver]

Yeah, I gotta agree. Not even sure if SATA was public when RH 9 came out. Fedora 3 or 4 SHOULD be used with similar confidence.

D.E.R. Management - IT Project Management Consulting

http://www.dermanagement.com/

 

[tinkertech]

I could not agree or desagree with either of the two of you since I'm sure you know more that I will ever forget about Linux, however, a customer of mine has asked me to install RedHat on this system. But it gets trickier. Not only is this system Dual SATA HDDs, this system must consists of a dual opteron mobo with NVidia's SLI dual graphics cards. We'll see if I can put this one off. Any other thoughts before I start crying and biting my nails here?

If at first you don't succeed, reboot!

 

[flugh]

You could probably pitch Fedora to your customer as the 'free version of most of its enterprise distro' or similar (I've never used Redhat's pay-for-use stuff, so can't cite any differences). And push the customer away from Redhat 9.0, as it's just a little too old to support this high speed hardware he wants. Not saying you couldn't roll up a current kernel for older redhat, but that takes time and time cost$

----
JBR

 

[tinkertech]

roll up a current kernel for older redhat" What does that mean? I will, however, try to sell my customer the idea of going for Fedora over Redhat. I think one if his programmers is sold on Redhat and that is what they are going with.

If at first you don't succeed, reboot!

 

[flugh]

I don't remember where I picked up "roll your own", but it was a dumb way of saying "compile your own binaries from source", especiall "roll your own kernel". Anyway, you could probably have some luck with downloading the current kernel's source, configuring it for the desired hardware, compiling, and installing. But that can be a real pain in the but, and again cost$ time and money. Me, I prefer the pre-tested and bundled up stuff that comes with a distro. Fedora has always proven dependable for me in the past, so I feel confident recommending it for production usage (your mileage may vary though, don't blame me ;-))

----
JBR

 

[tinkertech]

I won't, thank for the tips. I sure hope I can pull this one. Tomorrow morning I will atempt to install RedHat on the first system.

If at first you don't succeed, reboot!

 

[TrojanWarBlade]

Can we just point out here that Fedora is RedHat.
It's RedHat's current "free" version.
This is why I suggested it in the first place.


Trojan.

 

[tinkertech]

Thanks Trojan but at this point I must go with RH9. I have everything hooked up. MB, SATA, IDE CDROM, FDD. I powered up and RH does not see the devise driver for mass storage device. I tried using the SATA diskette that came with the MoBo but no luck. RH does give me a list of devise drivers but I'm not sure which to pick. I am testing each one at a time until it selects the right one.

If at first you don't succeed, reboot!

 

[thedaver]

You're wasting your time then

D.E.R. Management - IT Project Management Consulting

http://www.dermanagement.com/

 

[tinkertech]

too much at stake to give up that easily daver, do thank you however, for your suggestions. Someone here must have come across this devil and beat it before. Can that brave warrior help me on this occation.

If at first you don't succeed, reboot!

 

[thedaver]

Thanks Trojan but at this point I must go with RH9

Why?

You're a couple of ISO downloads from having Fedora Core 4 in your hands with guaranteed support for SATA. AND FC4 is supported with bug fixes and security patches.

RH9 is NOT supported for bug fixes nor will it receive any new application versions!

You're making crazy talk about trying to fix a problem you don't need to have. C'mon Brother, see the light. Don't make this harder than it needs to be!


D.E.R. Management - IT Project Management Consulting

http://www.dermanagement.com/

 

[Chacalinc]

thedaver:

I don't understand it too... FC4 is the right solution!

Chacal, Inc.

 

[IRudebwoy]

FC4 was mentioned in another thread tintertech started about the same topic.

thread619-1103255

I say, do it right the first time.

Put Redhat 9 to rest. Especially for this set up.

## Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

Lorenzo Wacondo (System Administrator)

http://www.laguna-industries.com

 

[tinkertech]

Ok, thanks guys for your words of wisdom, however, it is my understanding that my clients want to keep this OS version because there is already in existance some application that they will be running on these systems using RH. Call it a crazy approach and I will agree. From time to time, I get requests to integrate a system with 10 GB HD and DOS runing on them because it is more expensive to rewrite software for newer HW. Go figure. AND the HW must be NEW, not used or referbished, NEW. Good thing we got Ebay.

If at first you don't succeed, reboot!

 

[zeland]

If you are really hell-bent on getting RH9 to work on SATA you'll need to:

- Get an ATA HDD of the same size
- Install RH9
- Download new kernel source
- Download all dependencies
- Compile everything you need and install them
- Reboot into new kernel
- Test mount the SATA HDD
- Boot into single user mode and DD ATA to SATA
Estimated Time of Completion: 3~4 Days

If you complete the above steps, you should have a system close to that of an FC4 install although the login screen will still say RedHat. I had pointed somebody do that (no details on how he accomplished that) just to have the SATA drive die 2 days later and had to repeat the process again. 7 wasted days. Wow.


--== Anything can go wrong. It's just a matter of how far wrong it will go till people think its right. ==--

 

[tinkertech]

No time. this thing got to go out in three days.

If at first you don't succeed, reboot!

 

[tinkertech]

Zeland, on another site's forum someone mentioned something similar to what you suggested. Loading RH9 on an IDE drive, which I have done, no size was specified, unlike your tip, then get the now kernel source, but frankly, I have no idea what that means. Than image to SATA drive. How do you download and install a new kernel source?

If at first you don't succeed, reboot!

 

[zeland]

The kernel is what makes your system run. Newer kernel releases usually come with newer/better drivers to support the latest hardware. The latest 2.6.x kernel series have support for SATA which is not available in the 2.4.x kernel series that RH9 uses. You can get the latest 2.6.x kernel source from www.kernel.org.


--== Anything can go wrong. It's just a matter of how far wrong it will go till people think its right. ==--