But the strange thing is that FC3 on the same machine does install quicker... And I'm using the graphical installer in both cases. Reason for me to use the NFS install is the easiness, I only need one install-cd for all machines. It could be very well be possible Anaconda got bigger/slower for older machines. --- On Wed 05/18, Billy Tallis < wtallis at gmail.com > wrote: From: Billy Tallis [mailto: wtallis at gmail.com] To: fedora-test-list at redhat.com Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 15:50:37 -0400 Subject: Re: Slooooow installation FC4t3 So selecting packages and the installing of them were at reasonable speed, but configuring things was slow? With the amount of ram you have, I am assuming that you were using the text mode installer. The only thing I can suggest is to do an install from cds next time, or use slinky from www.rule-project.org/download , as it is designed for low memory systems. Hopefully the homepage will be back up soon and slinky can be updated for FC4. It sounds like anaconda was too slow fetching the next step over nfs, but I thought that it keeps the whole installer in RAM. It could be that anaconda has just bloated more since FC3. _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com