rh9.0 install

[Don Levey]

 wrote:
> don writes:
>> Out of curiosity, is there a particular reason you've
>> chosen RH9?  This has passed the end-of-life date from
>> RedHat, which means that RH is no longer supporting this
>> product.  At the very least, you may want to take a look
>> at Fedora (http://fedora.redhat.com), which seems to be
>> the successor to the RedHat Linux line.
> 
> well, i thought it not unreasonable, since i already had
> the disks, was running rh9.0 on two other machines, and
> had not yet looked into fedora or acquired any iso's.
> 
> do you think getting the fedora iso's will improve this
> puzzling situation?  i guess i'm willing to try, but it
> doesn't seem likely.  anyway, i have found blu support
> better than that from red hat.
> 
> dan

Dan,
It is a bit odd.  Is your hardware, by any chance, "non-standard" 
or otherwise less-known?  Perhaps the standard drivers aren't working 
(though it seems unlikely, considering the symptoms).

My personal experience is that the Fedora installer works more
cleanly than RH9, but it's been a while since I've installed RH9
and don't remember things all that well.  I do seem to recall that
the RH installer was VERY finicky about the CDs; I sometimes
needed to burn 5-6 images before I got a disk that passed their
tests and worked.  This also seemed to differ from machine to
machine as drive alignment was subtly different for each.


It's not that Fedora brings better or RH support per se, but RH 
is sponsoring the project.  Fedora is also actively developed 
and maintained; release 2 should be coming out soon.  It also 
(supposedly) has a much larger base of installed hardware.

It may be worthwhile, just as a test, to bring down the disk 1 ISO.
Then you could try to start the install and see if you run into the
language problem persists.  

 -Don