Defeated by Linux [Update: CentOS saves the day]

[PliotronX]

So I came in an office and while I was backing up a VHD to create a new RAID array I was tasked with setting up an old system for just one website and to save the owner the cost of a 7 license I thought Id install a nice distro. Preparing for most cases of system specs, I had x64 Mint 17, Zorin 9 i586, and Peppermint 5 i586. To cut a long story short, none of them worked. Mint complained about the x server not booting just on booting the DVD, Zorin gave some error about syslinux indicating the ISO was for USB drives but nowhere on the download page did it indicate such, and Peppermint installed but cannot launch the DM (yes tried masses of apt-get commands). So why does this Athlon 64 3200+ VIA system hate linux? I am going to try ROSA, Xubuntu, and possibly the root of it all Ubuntu but this is a first in my book of defeats. Ugh.

 

[meloz]

Why are you going after hobby and novelty distros. Just use Xubuntu. These small time distros like Zorin et al do not get the testing and usage of more mainstream distros like Xubuntu so there might be occasional oops.

Also, you might have issues with corrupted ISOs. Sometimes files get corrupted during download process. After downloading the Xubuntu ISO, sha256 it.

 

[jhu]

Try Ubuntu, Debian, CentOS, or FreeBSD. Why use those smaller distributions?

 

[PliotronX]

Good points, I wanted to mess with lighter weight and more familiar looking distros (than Ubuntu). I never had issues with Zorin 7 or Peppermint 4. Xubuntu it is

Definitely will hash that ISO.

 

[Tarvaln]

I recommend Debian "Jessie". It can be a little painful to get things to work but I've managed to accomplish just about everything I've needed with it on an 4 yr old Toshiba laptop.

 

[lxskllr]

What gfx does it use? I haven't seen the name VIA in a long time. In any case, I'd also use Xubuntu or Lubuntu. Debian wouldn't be a bad choice, but as said above, it may take more messing with. I'd also stick to stable in the case of Debian. Testing gives too many updates, especially for a system that's only acting as a web browser.

 

[zokudu]

Is it going to be for serving a website or viewing it? I would definitely consider the Red Hat distro lines Fedora if it's a workstation and CentOS if it's a server. I've had great success using those in my largely windows environment especially compared to Debian stable which I had difficulty integrating into a windows environment.

 

[Scarpozzi]

If it's a production system, don't even bother with Ubuntu. I still think of it as a workstation distro.

I'd stick to CentOS or RedHat. They'll give you proven standards with plenty of stability and testing. The only thing to be aware of is the app versions that ship with your version are locked, so you have to know what applications you're going to deploy to make sure stock dependencies are compatible. I've seen this as an issue for php in the past. Install CentOS 7 and you should be good. I just installed a server on Friday.

I'm currently running like 35 RHEL 5/6 systems and about 8 CentOS 5/6 systems....and the lone Cent7 box. My desktop/laptop are Xubuntu.

 

[pauldun170]

I was tasked with setting up an old system for just one website and to save the owner the cost of a 7 license ....

So why does this Athlon 64 3200+ VIA system hate linux?

I don't think that is right move for a business. An old via chipset + that proc (assuming its the original single core one) just sounds like too many headaches.

For a production website, I'd stick to CENTOS.
What kind of website is it?
Do you have any budget for HW? You could probably build something on the cheap.

 

[ultimatebob]

Is this old system hosting the web site, or is the user just viewing a web site with Firefox?

If it's a simple web server, why are you bothering to install a GUI on it at all? Just do a base CentOS install, do a yum install httpd to install the web server and take off from there.

 

[PliotronX]

I don't think that is right move for a business. An old via chipset + that proc (assuming its the original single core one) just sounds like too many headaches.

For a production website, I'd stick to CENTOS.
What kind of website is it?
Do you have any budget for HW? You could probably build something on the cheap.

The owner is a CB, that's why A $250 fully loaded Intel NUC was too pricey. They found this circa 2003 system under somebodys desk. To answer your question guys, it's just a site viewer, or kiosk. I am unsure what kind of graphics chipset it uses, but it is onboard which is probably the issue. This is SuperVGA-barely-on-a-motherboard era stuff.

Xubuntu was a no-go, same issue that Mint 17 had; after installation and upon bootup lightdm fails to load and I tried all kinds of config fixes including the HEED_DEFAULT_DISPLAY_MANAGER.

OpenSUSE works fine but this SuperVGA is pretty choppy, I'd venture this is why Ubuntu variants hated it. I'll see if I can scrounge up an old AGP card for this thing but it is working now LOL.

 

[sourceninja]

If it's a production system, don't even bother with Ubuntu. I still think of it as a workstation distro.

I'd stick to CentOS or RedHat. They'll give you proven standards with plenty of stability and testing. The only thing to be aware of is the app versions that ship with your version are locked, so you have to know what applications you're going to deploy to make sure stock dependencies are compatible. I've seen this as an issue for php in the past. Install CentOS 7 and you should be good. I just installed a server on Friday.

I'm currently running like 35 RHEL 5/6 systems and about 8 CentOS 5/6 systems....and the lone Cent7 box. My desktop/laptop are Xubuntu.

Why would you think of Ubuntu as a workstation distro? They have a solid LTS server release with sane standards and solid compatibility. They have nice commercial products to manage those servers (if your puppet/salt adverse) and even have a really nice way to deploy openstack.

I've managed environments of 300+ Ubuntu servers from 6-12 and I've never had a problem with them. In many cases I've found them a bit easier to deal with than centOS because when I needed to do something out of the box I could typically find a ubuntu based article to help point me in the right direction.

 

[PliotronX]

Okay, something in this system *cough*onboardvideo*cough* doesn't like anything Debian,. After finding some generic NVIDIA card which sped up openSUSE quite a bit but froze, reminding me why this AGP card was in a box on a rarely used rack, I tried an older release of Debian with the OBV and it installed but gives a black screen on boot just like Peppermint 5. Ahhhh! So I am going to settle on CentOS 5.10 due to the RH lineage. Geeze, you really have to dig for older systems... most distros used to run on just about any x86 machine.

edit: should have started with CentOS, awesome.

 

[zokudu]

Is there a reason you chose Centos and version 5 at that? Did you try some of the more up to date distros like Fedora? They should have similar compatibility.

 

[PliotronX]

Is there a reason you chose Centos and version 5 at that? Did you try some of the more up to date distros like Fedora? They should have similar compatibility.

Just didn't want to risk it being bloated and run like openSUSE, tired of trying all these versions and 5.10 is EOL in 2017.

update: CentOS is solid, though still unresponsive at times even though I threw another half gig of RAM in there but its not going to be doing Flash thank goodness.

 

[ultimatebob]

Is there a reason you chose Centos and version 5 at that? Did you try some of the more up to date distros like Fedora? They should have similar compatibility.

The problem with Fedora is that you only get 12 months of support until you get cut off from security updates and are forced to upgrade. Because of that, it makes it a pain to maintain for something like an Internet connected Kiosk system.

Oh... and I bet that CentOS would have worked with that crummy onboard video if you modified the xorg.conf file to use the vesa drivers. You might have been stuck at 1024x768 screen resolution, but I bet that it would at least launched the GUI.

 

[PliotronX]

The problem with Fedora is that you only get 12 months of support until you get cut off from security updates and are forced to upgrade. Because of that, it makes it a pain to maintain for something like an Internet connected Kiosk system.

Oh... and I bet that CentOS would have worked with that crummy onboard video if you modified the xorg.conf file to use the vesa drivers. You might have been stuck at 1024x768 screen resolution, but I bet that it would at least launched the GUI.

Good points! I noticed that too, and considering we are between those EOL cycles, the current version will only be updated for a few months. CentOS is perfect, exactly what I was looking for. Would it be a little faster under VESA? It is running okay at 1280x1024 just that sometimes it will lag especially when opening or closing FF which shouldnt happen often. I think my standards of responsiveness are too high, the users of the timeclock will likely be happy

 

[ultimatebob]

Good points! I noticed that too, and considering we are between those EOL cycles, the current version will only be updated for a few months. CentOS is perfect, exactly what I was looking for. Would it be a little faster under VESA? It is running okay at 1280x1024 just that sometimes it will lag especially when opening or closing FF which shouldnt happen often. I think my standards of responsiveness are too high, the users of the timeclock will likely be happy

No, the "nv" XOrg drivers should probably perform better with the NVidia card that you added in, assuming that the card you added wasn't one of the ultra low end models or is more than 10 years old.

You could also try downloading the latest NVidia Linux drivers from their website and try those as well, but don't be suprised if you have to get a backlevel version that works with CentOS 5.

 

[PliotronX]

No, the "nv" XOrg drivers should probably perform better with the NVidia card that you added in, assuming that the card you added wasn't one of the ultra low end models or is more than 10 years old.

You could also try downloading the latest NVidia Linux drivers from their website and try those as well, but don't be suprised if you have to get a backlevel version that works with CentOS 5.

Oh, I see! Thank you, I trashed that NVIDIA due to random freezing that it also did under Windows, dont know why it was still around. I couldnt find another PCI or AGP card so its just running the VIA/S3 onboard but if I do find another NVIDIA I will keep that in mind!