On 12/15/2015 01:50 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 12/15/2015 10:15 AM, ken wrote:
It's good to that. I've just tried that seven times (three different
flashdrives 'dd' using different USB ports, then created one CD) and
the media test failed each time. I wish those downloads listed
cksums/md5sums.
As far as I can tell, they do:
http://mirror.confluxtech.com/centos/7/isos/x86_64/
Various sums for the ISOs, and signatures for the sum file.
Sure, maybe it's possible to chase down the information. It used to be
that info was (eminently sensible) on the same webpage. We're getting
away from sensible webpages.
It's good to have all this info together in one email.
On the other hand, people should know the Minimal really sucks:
* No dual-boot set up.
CentOS is a rebuild of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, whose target use case
is business servers and workstations. Dual-boot is not a typical or
supported use case for RHEL.
I figured it was a simple hand-off from RH. Just because it's from RH
doesn't means it makes sense. It also doesn't necessarily mean that
CentOS couldn't do a better job of it... especially that it horks dual
booting.
Dual-boot can be set up manually by editing /etc/grub.d/40_custom:
menuentry "Windows" {
set root='(hd0,1)'
chainloader +1
}
Adjust (hd0,1) to match the partition number where Windows is installed.
Run "grub2-mkconfig -o /etc/grub2-efi.cfg"
Thanks much for that. I'll give that a try. The question arises, if
it's this easy to do by hand, why couldn't the code (if not from RH,
then at least from CentOS) build a little option in to preserve
dual-booting (for many folks who don't have a helpful dude like yourself
nearby in the email list)?
* The resultant OS was text only. I.e., it wouldn't run init 5...
trying to do so would cause to hang.
I don't recall who recommended that you use the Minimal ISO, but it was
bad advice. Minimal is useful to experienced admins who want to build a
very small system image with only the specific packages they need. It
can be used to build a desktop system, but that's a lot of work (or
knowledge).
You would have been better off with CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1511.iso or
CentOS-7-x86_64-LiveGNOME-1511.iso (or KDE). I apologize on everyone's
behalf for not contradicting that advice.
You don't have to apologize. There's whole lot of documentation needed.
* Maybe the above problem was due to bad coding somewhere-- the entire
OS horked a couple times... then I finally saw error code saying,
"kernel panic". I haven't gotten one of those in decades.
There's not much to go on there. We have no idea what caused the panic,
whether it was a bug or not.
I corroborated the md5sum all along with way from the source on the web
to the finished CD. The installed OS hung once, black-screened, and a
third (and last) time hung with "kernel panic" (and a lot of other error
language). I checked the web if there was any mention of problems with
linux with my cpu, but found only people mentioned video configuration
(not relevant in this situation). I've been using Windows for several
days and had zero problems which would indicate any hardware problems.
Maybe other folks would need to see if they're having the same or
contrary experience. Until then, I have to stand with my assessment.
Geez, what a terrible ISO distro!
I don't think that's a fair assessment. CentOS (and RHEL) is one of the
most stable systems I've ever used.
I mean only the Minimal v.7... this distro-package, not CentOS or RH
altogether. I've been a fan of the latter for a long time. Even rarely
RH can squeeze out a real hot stinker.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
