Linux Help
guides forums blogs
Home Desktops Distributions ISO Images Logos Newbies Reviews Software Support & Resources Linuxhelp Wiki

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Advanced DNS Management
New ZoneEdit. New Managment.


Sign Up Now
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> What Are The Real Minimum Rh9 Requirements?
post Oct 8 2003, 08:24 PM
Post #1

Whats this Lie-nix Thing?

Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 7-August 03
Member No.: 1,222

What are the real minimum requirements for Red Hat 9? A friend is trying to install RH9 Personal Desktop on his Windows PC which has only 2 GB left on the hard drive, runs at 133 MHz and has a video card with 2 MB of RAM. When he tried to start up, the graphical install environment wouldn't run. If I were to believe the requirements I saw at one website for RH9, I would have to accept that you need a minimum of 64 MB of RAM and a 200 MHz CPU to run WITHOUT X11??? That just cannot be. I thought Linux could run on a 486 CPU? What are the real requirements if you want to run X11? I also heard that the steep system requirements I read about were only for the install program to work. That is just silly. Why would they require a minumum of a Pentium 200 MHz to install Linux, but then say it will run (once installed) on a 486? That makes no sense!!! Anyone who can give me a straight answer on the system requirements for RH9 with and without running X11 (including minimum video card RAM)?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Oct 8 2003, 09:21 PM
Post #2

Its GNU/

Group: Support Specialist
Posts: 1,807
Joined: 23-January 03
Member No.: 360

The min requirements are just what RH says. linux distros are not all the same.

All the latest versions of the major distributions require better hardware. I don't see anywhere on RH's webstite that you need a pentium to install but 486 to run.

There are distros about that still run on 386's that will work with min hardware. Some even have x with a lightweight windows manager like fluxbox. slackware is a good distro that runs on min hardware.

Other Distribution ideas:
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Oct 9 2003, 05:01 AM
Post #3

Its GNU/

Group: Admin
Posts: 3,433
Joined: 25-July 03
From: Corpus Chrsiti, TX, USA
Member No.: 1,151

The newer distros have new features, larger kernels, and more autodetection. This requires more memory to run. Most newer distributions are also compiled to run on a pentium/athlon (or better) processor.

The installers are designed to detect more and more hardware ... and they setup partitions on a RAM drive when running ... making them require even more RAM than the actual program.

I have installed RH 9.0 on a pentium II 266, 8 gb hard drive, 128 mb RAM laptop with a 4mb video card ... and X-windows is SLOW!!!!!!

You could install RH 9.0 (with the text mode installer) on a 486 ... and if you only installed text based items (like only the packages required to create a firewall) ... it would probably be OK. If you wanted a fully functioning system with X-windows though, you would need a much better PC.
What makes RH 9 be RH 9 is the version of the kernel it runs (a high 2.4.x version) and the versions of the GNU software it picks to include ... all these newer progams that are included (apache httpd server, mysql database, openoffice suite, etc...) require more memory and more hard drive space. That's why the specs required get to be more and more...
I wouldn't recommend using products that don't meet the minumum specs ... they are how the software is designed.

Johnny Hughes
Enterprise Alternatives: CentOS, WhiteBoxEL
Favorite Workstation Distros (in order): CentOS, Gentoo, Debian Sarge, Ubuntu, Mandrake, FedoraCore, Slackware, SUSE
Favorite Server Distros (in order): CentOS, WhiteBoxEL, Debian Sarge, Slackware, Mandrake, FedoraCore, Gentoo, SUSE
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 16th July 2018 - 07:12 PM