I not only tried different speeds, but different machines. I work in a computer lab, so I tried two of the machines in the lab, as well as my laptop. I did not vary the burn speeds on any one machine, so it wasn't completely scientific. However, the burns of the first two discs turned out ok and they were done on my laptop with the same speed (16x) as the laptop-burned copy of disc 3.
You are correct. Since you didn't vary the burn speed your test weren't valid. It is the data patterns that make the burning fail. The fact that disk image works and another fails is "luck".
To me, all of this adds up to this: something is wrong with disc 3 of the x86-64 iso. I could be wrong. Has anybody had a positive installation experience with disc 3 of the x86-64 (not i386) iso? (If so, that blows my theory).
You did say that "md5sum disk3.iso" matched what is listed on the website. That indicates the download was OK. But, you said the "media check" of the install process failed. That indicates a bad burn.
Oh, by the way, I am (at this very minute) installing from DVD, and (konck on wood) the installation seems to be going fine.
Thanks everybody for all of your input.
-- "I think the problem, to be quite honest with you, is that you've never actually known what the question is."
--The computer "Deep Thought" in "Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy"
-- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
