LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 08-10-2004, 04:37 PM   #16
Komakino
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Somerset, England
Distribution: Slackware 10.2, Slackware 10.0, Ubuntu 9.10
Posts: 1,938

Rep: Reputation: 55

Perhaps it's a hacked version of RedHat (hacked together I mean, not literally hacked) for release within that particular company and therefore doesn't quite correspond to any actual Red Hat version.
 
Old 08-10-2004, 04:38 PM   #17
Tinkster
Moderator
 
Registered: Apr 2002
Location: in a fallen world
Distribution: slackware by choice, others too :} ... android.
Posts: 23,066
Blog Entries: 11

Rep: Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910
Quote:
Originally posted by 320mb
So technically it should be called KDE/Perl/GNU/linux........Richard Stallman did NOT write the "Kernel" and Richard Stallman did NOT have
any thing to do with Linux development at all.........so Technically GNU is NOT part of linux........
C'mon mate, let's not go there ... Linux without GNU would
be pretty darn blank. Yes, I know that Linux is the kernel,
and you could compile any old tool for it, but lets face it:

How many non-GNU compilers and linkers or any other
old open-source tool can you get? :)

No, I don't call Linux GNU/Linux myself, but that's not
out of consideration for anyones turf but just because
I'm too lazy, and it's quite a mouth full :}


Cheers,
Tink
 
Old 08-10-2004, 04:40 PM   #18
Tinkster
Moderator
 
Registered: Apr 2002
Location: in a fallen world
Distribution: slackware by choice, others too :} ... android.
Posts: 23,066
Blog Entries: 11

Rep: Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910
Quote:
Originally posted by hopbalt
OK I did that and it said "GEMS Linux release"

GEMS is the name of the company that used to own this machine. They gave it away to a friend of mine who works there because they upgraded all their machines and threw the old ones away. Then the friend gave it to me.

What I dont understand is that even when the GUI loads up, it doesnt tell you antying about what version of Redhat it is.

I hope the RPM I'm downloading works.
Next thing I'd do when stuck with an RPM based distro
is
rpm -qa | less
and see whether any of the packages give an indication
of what version of the distro they belong to.


Cheers,
Tink
 
Old 08-10-2004, 04:43 PM   #19
hopbalt
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Posts: 39

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally posted by rjlee You could also try running “locate SuSE”, “locate debian” etc. as most distributions install at least one configuration or setup file containing the distro's name.
I ran this command with locate RedHat, and it gave me a listing of 3 files, so this strengthens my suspicion that it is in fact a RedHat machine. Now unfortunately NONE of those files told me what version of redhat it was.

Quote:
2) All major distributions usually ship with a C compiler on the install disks. This doesn't mean it will necessarily be installed. Assuming you're on an RPM based system (most distros except Debian seem to use RPM), you can run the command
Code:
rpm -qil gcc | more
to see information and installed files for the gcc package.
OK I did rpm -qil gcc | more and it said "package gcc not installed"

Quote:
If you don't have gcc (and you don't have the origninal install disks), then you'll need to go to http://www.rpmfind.net/ and download a binary RPM for gcc. rpmfind.net will also list several “dependency” programs and libraries like glibc; your system will need the right versions of all the various dependencies; either installed (rpm -qi name again to find out the versions you have) or downloaded as extra RPMs.
OH man this sounds like a mess. I'm sure I'll run into more problems along the way.

You can install the rpms using
Code:
rpm --install *.rpm
in the directory you downloaded from.

Quote:
Note: gcc is big and will take a long time to download and install, especially if you try to download its dependencies as well.
I am only downloading the main file currently, and I still have 13 hours and 9 minutes to go.

Quote:
4) As with any linux program, a C compiler will not work on all versions of Linux. It is, however, possible to compile a program and link it statically (copying the library routines instead of linking to them) so that it will work on any Linux or UNIX system with the same processor (and anything compiled for a 386 will run on later Intel processors too).
I guess I'll try that if I get desperate and this package doesnt work.

Quote:
Hope that's of some help,

— Robert J. Lee
Yes thank you very much

Last edited by hopbalt; 08-10-2004 at 04:46 PM.
 
Old 08-10-2004, 04:50 PM   #20
hopbalt
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Posts: 39

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally posted by Tinkster
Next thing I'd do when stuck with an RPM based distro
is
rpm -qa | less
and see whether any of the packages give an indication
of what version of the distro they belong to.


Cheers,
Tink
BINGO! One of the outputs from this command was:

"redhat-release-7.3-1"

Man this machine has a lot of stuff on it, I had to scroll thru about 5000 things before I stumbled on to that.
 
Old 08-10-2004, 04:52 PM   #21
penguin4
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: california
Distribution: mdklinux8.1
Posts: 1,209

Rep: Reputation: 45
hopbalt; BINGO u got it! knew u could ,would & DID! Good job n welcome to linux world.!!!!
 
Old 08-10-2004, 05:03 PM   #22
hopbalt
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Posts: 39

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Another question:

what if I just compile the program on another machine that has exactly the same processor, kernel version, and Red Hat version and then copy the executable over to the other machine.

will that work?

I have access to another machine that DOES have gcc installed so I wouldnt have to use that rpm stuff.
 
Old 08-10-2004, 05:06 PM   #23
Tinkster
Moderator
 
Registered: Apr 2002
Location: in a fallen world
Distribution: slackware by choice, others too :} ... android.
Posts: 23,066
Blog Entries: 11

Rep: Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910
Quote:
Originally posted by hopbalt
what if I just compile the program on another machine that has exactly the same processor, kernel version, and Red Hat version and then copy the executable over to the other machine.

will that work?
Should work OK ... ;)

Glad I could help with the identification, btw :}



Cheers,
Tink
 
Old 08-10-2004, 05:10 PM   #24
penguin4
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: california
Distribution: mdklinux8.1
Posts: 1,209

Rep: Reputation: 45
Tinkster; one of many Guru,s thank you! can always count on your support!
 
Old 08-10-2004, 05:10 PM   #25
hopbalt
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Posts: 39

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Hmmm... this is getting more interesting all the time.

I found a website that claims to have a list of all RedHat versions and their associated kernel numbers. Somebody on this thread said they had nothing to do with each other, so now I'm confused.

http://www.unixgods.org/~tilo/redhat_versions.html

My uname -a output was:

Linux <MACHINE_NAME> 2.4.20-20.7.XFS1.3.1smp

so according to this website, my Red Hat version must be version 9, not version 7.3 like that file said. Is there somethign in between version 8.0 and 9.0, like a version 8.5 or something? Or is that an accurate listing of all releases of RedHat?

Can somebody take a look at this website and tell me if its legit?

Last edited by hopbalt; 08-10-2004 at 05:13 PM.
 
Old 08-10-2004, 05:15 PM   #26
proudclod
Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Fedora Core 2
Posts: 381

Rep: Reputation: 30
Yes, it looks like a slightly changed version of redhat 9, running a kernel with multiprocessor support compiled in, and XFS filesystem support.

I'd recommend installing a fresh install of a distro (Fedora 2, or whatever you want) and starting from fresh

Do you know what the specs are for the system? If not then these commands might help:

cat /proc/cpuinfo (processor info)
free (total memory in KB)
/sbin/lspci (graphics card and other pci cards)
 
Old 08-10-2004, 05:15 PM   #27
penguin4
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: california
Distribution: mdklinux8.1
Posts: 1,209

Rep: Reputation: 45
hopbalt; advise: use ur own knowledge & knowhow then add someothers
suggestions. if it helps u gain more knwledge ,if not then it was not worth
the effort. follow ur inner voice will not lead u astray, hmm!
 
Old 08-10-2004, 05:15 PM   #28
Komakino
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Somerset, England
Distribution: Slackware 10.2, Slackware 10.0, Ubuntu 9.10
Posts: 1,938

Rep: Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally posted by Tinkster
C'mon mate, let's not go there ... Linux without GNU would
be pretty darn blank. Yes, I know that Linux is the kernel,
and you could compile any old tool for it, but lets face it:

How many non-GNU compilers and linkers or any other
old open-source tool can you get?

No, I don't call Linux GNU/Linux myself, but that's not
out of consideration for anyones turf but just because
I'm too lazy, and it's quite a mouth full :}


Cheers,
Tink
Perhaps it's the way I phrased it, but it wasn't my intention to be pedantic along the lines you've interpreted this - I was trying to make the distinction between the versioning for the kernel and what is versioning for a specific distro, and trying to give a little background thereabouts.
 
Old 08-10-2004, 05:18 PM   #29
Komakino
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Somerset, England
Distribution: Slackware 10.2, Slackware 10.0, Ubuntu 9.10
Posts: 1,938

Rep: Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally posted by hopbalt


I found a website that claims to have a list of all RedHat versions and their associated kernel numbers. Somebody on this thread said they had nothing to do with each other, so now I'm confused.
No, I said you couldn't just add the kernel version to the distro to get the distro version (like you gave the example red hat 2.4 because uname returned the kernel version as 2.4). A specific distro release would have a specific kernel version, but that would require more research than simply adding the numbers together.

I think I'll leave this discussion now, perhaps I'm having a bad evening but I just seem to be confusing people.
 
Old 08-10-2004, 05:19 PM   #30
Tinkster
Moderator
 
Registered: Apr 2002
Location: in a fallen world
Distribution: slackware by choice, others too :} ... android.
Posts: 23,066
Blog Entries: 11

Rep: Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910Reputation: 910
Quote:
Originally posted by hopbalt
I found a website that claims to have a list of all RedHat versions and their associated kernel numbers. Somebody on this thread said they had nothing to do with each other, so now I'm confused.

http://www.unixgods.org/~tilo/redhat_versions.html

My uname -a output was:

Linux <MACHINE_NAME> 2.4.20-20.7.XFS1.3.1smp
Those matches are just the defaults ... if you install a new
distro of that type you're likely to have that kernel. Not
necessarily true the other way round since it's quite likely
that they for instance wanted to incorporate kernel security
patches at some stage and decided to just upgrade the
kernel, rather than the lot.

All dogs (normal, not mutilated and all that) have four legs,
but not everything with four legs is a dog.


Cheers,
Tink
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
checking for C compiler default output... configure: error: C compiler cannot create fiorejm Linux - Software 6 11-12-2009 01:35 PM
how i get C compiler in linux ss100 Linux - Software 2 01-10-2005 12:45 AM
Linux C++ Compiler hopmedic Programming 5 06-17-2004 04:37 PM
Is there a Forth compiler for LINUX quinnk Linux - Software 3 06-17-2004 12:07 PM
Compiler conundrum: Which came first, a compiler, or it's source code? fr0zen Programming 21 01-29-2004 05:31 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:04 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration