Re: RedHat Linux 7.2 needed.

On 12 Jul 2007, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.misc, in article
<y93myy1j8r9.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Allan Adler wrote:

ibuprofin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Moe Trin) writes:

On 5 Apr 2007, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.misc, in article

Geez Allan - that's a little slow on the response time, isn't it? That
was almost 7200 articles back from "now".

<1175763569.134607.136140@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, rk wrote:
can anyone please tell me where from can i download redhat linux 7.2?
thanks.
http://sunsite.mff.cuni.cz/MIRRORS/archive.download.redhat.com/redhat/linux/
Be advised that the release hasn't been supported in over three years,
and you _REALLY_DON'T_WANT_ to expose a box running this ancient
release to a hostile network.

There are a lot of reasons to run RH 7.2 and other old versions. I have
6.2 on one of my PC's and 5.2 on another one. I mentioned this on
gnu.gcc.help and learned that some people make it a point to use old
versions of RH such as 6.2 to make sure that the C programs they write
will run on all versions after and including 6.2.

There's nothing wrong with running ancient distributions. I have access
to systems that are running Red Hat 2.1, 3.0.3, and 4.2 in "out-of-box"
condition (from 1995, 1996, and 1997 respectively), and can bring up
systems running Soft Landing Systems release 1.03 from 1993 or Slackware
1.1.2 from 1994 if need be. But that isn't what I advocated.

Also, I've found from discussions on this NG that some people who are
worried about you being on the net with an old version are assuming
that you are online with broadband or some other constant high speed
access. I don't remember whether Moe Trin is one of them.

I don't differentiate between broad-band, dial-up, or wet string. I
state simply "you _REALLY_DON'T_WANT_ to expose a box running this
(or any other) ancient release to a hostile network." You might get
away with running wu-ftpd-2.4.2b on a 2.0.3x kernel because no one
would _believe_ that anyone would be that foolish. But I _really_
don't think I'd put any confidence in that installation remaining
un-r00ted for any length of time. The systems I mention above are
running on an isolated network simply because they are so easy to
knock over (assuming someone can remember the vulnerabilities).

The Stanford Music Department, if I remember right, has several
versions of RH and Fedora for free download, including RH 7.3.

Why stop there? ftp://ibiblio.org/pub/historic-linux/distributions/
has distributions going back to the early 1990s - including early
versions of SLS, Slackware, Debian, Yggdrasil, and others.

I downloaded them and installed their 7.3 on an ancient computer that
can't run anything much more recent for hardware reasons.

As long as hardware isn't free, it is perfectly acceptable to use old
versions of RH on old computers. Software that can't be used without
spending a lot of money on a new computer is not really free in my
opinion.

I have no idea where you are located, but here in the USA, dumpster
diving or garage sales will usually turn up recent hardware that is
more than adequate to run a modern distribution for next to no cost.
I recently bought a 500 MHz Celeron with 256 Megs of RAM, 6.4 Gig
drive, and a crappy but usable 15 inch CRT monitor for US$30. If you
look at the RELEASE-NOTES file for Fedora Core 7, you'll find this
is better than the "Recommended" hardware for that distribution.

It's probably a bit early to be looking for the systems people will
be throwing away because they lack the horsepower to run Vista, but
I am seeing systems that won't run XP with all of the bells, whistles,
and mal-ware that normally gets installed. These are more than enough
for running a non-windoze version of Linux, or one of the *BSDs.

Old guy
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Universal sound card?
    ... hardware in the different distributions. ... neurons that are still missing from the brains of the mere Windows mortals. ... none of the distributions you're using support connecting to ... The first thing would be the kernel version supplied with each of the ...
    (comp.os.linux.hardware)
  • Re: Universal sound card?
    ... hardware in the different distributions. ... neurons that are still missing from the brains of the mere Windows mortals. ... The first thing would be the kernel version supplied with each of the ... recent kernels have more hardware support than older kernels. ...
    (comp.os.linux.hardware)
  • Re: Quake performance SGI vs Sun
    ... I just installed latest ATI drivers for RADEON 9700 PRO, ... because I have only 25 ms response time in the display this means there ... Just For Fun here is my current hardware ARSEnal: ... Octane below PEECEE boxes, but for uses I have for my computers the CPU ...
    (comp.sys.sun.hardware)
  • Re: Building two servers
    ... >> I do see chances for trouble with hardware supported only with other ... I know Red Hat does not ship ... Most venders refer to certain distributions only, ... But Debian is not mentioned there. ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: VAXstation 4
    ... the hardware needed to connect to and boot from CD-ROM, ... The VAX 8530, on the other hand, requires a magtape or InfoServer ... Only if it has compatible media with the other systems, ... distributions stacked up somewhere in a shipping department, ...
    (comp.sys.dec)