Re: installing RH9 without CDs

From: Jacob Heider (lord-jacob_at_comcast.net)
Date: 11/05/03 

Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 02:58:26 GMT

On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 18:01:02 +0000, Robert M. Riches Jr wrote:

> In article <pan.2003.11.04.06.15.06.583811@comcast.net>, Jacob Heider
> wrote:
>>
>> ... "Gratis" SuSe, is only installable by ftp. I find this a pain (even
>> over cable), but if you only want to dl what you need, then it might be
>> worth looking at. If you buy the CDs, they come with non-free software
>> that prevents their redistribution. Just because Redhat has changed
>> their vision and name of their gratis operating system to Fedora
>> shouldn't prevent you from using it at home and redistributing it at
>> will. If price and legal usage rights are your main concern, then I see
>> no reason to not use Fedora.
>
> Thanks for the info.
>
> I guess I don't understand the SuSE ftp installation method. How does that
> work? For example, do you just download a bunch of stuff by ftp and
> _then_ do the install, or is there an "installer" program that does the
> installation _while_ it downloads the files?

The latter.

> If the former, then it would
> seem technologically possible to put the content from ftp on CDs and
> install from them. If the latter, how can it be installed on a brand-new
> bare machine that has only the BIOS installed?

You need the boot floppy and a supported network card/modem, and internet
connection.

> Also, if the latter,
> doesn't that make the installation process vulnerable to network outages,
> potentially leaving the machine unusable?

I'm sure it does. I've never had that problem the few times I've tried
SuSE, but I suppose it's possible.

> Finally, there are security
> issues with having a machine on the internet with default network and
> security settings.

Yes, but it's a fairly minimal "machine", setup to do just one thing.

> (I would prefer to install, then tune network and
> security settings, _then_ connect the machine to the network.)
>

No arguments here. :)
 
> There are two main reasons I'm not (yet) gung-ho on Fedora. One is the
> statements that Fedora will be used for testing new stuff before putting
> it in Redhat, thereby (ab)using Fedora users as guinnea pigs.

Red Hat has always used RHL as a test-bed for stuff before it goes into
their enterprise edition...

> There are
> already published statements that Fedora is likely to be less stable.

Possible. I'll believe it when I see it.

> The
> other reason is lack of Redhat professional SQA, bug fixes, and the like.

The best argument against fedora. If you need the stuff, you'll probably
have to pay for it.

>
> Again, thanks for the inf about SuSE.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Robert Riches
> spamtrap42@verizon.net
> (Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

You're welcome. If Fedora goes south on me, I may end up trying SuSE, or
more like Gentoo, again, but I don't need to stop using RH9 yet, so I have
time to wait and see.

Jacob