Bug 232941
Summary: | Installation problems with x86_64, dual core, gateway box. | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Patrick C McKelvey PE <pmckelvey> |
Component: | kernel | Assignee: | Kernel Maintainer List <kernel-maint> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Brian Brock <bbrock> |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 6 | CC: | triage |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | bzcl34nup | ||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2008-05-06 19:22:49 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Patrick C McKelvey PE
2007-03-19 15:44:59 UTC
intel 64 is NOT ia64. I have the same identical problem when I use the i386 iso. I have the same identical problem when I use the i386 iso with "linux i686". Are you able to get to the stage 2 part of the installer or does it end before that? Stage 2 starts up after the initial text-mode configuration interface after it says, "Starting anaconda, the Fedora installation program..." If you make it to stage 2, please attach /tmp/anaconda.log and /tmp/syslog so we can see what's going on. If you don't make it to stage 2, please report what is on tty3 (Alt+F3) after you get the no driver found message. If you don't make it to stage 2, please report what is on tty3 (Alt+F3) after you get the no driver found message. OK At Alt+F3, the last 6 lines are: 15:32:26 INFO : modules to insert usb-storage 15:32;27 INFO ; inserted /tmp/usb-storage.ko 15:32:27 INFO ; load module set done 15:32:27 INFO ; load module set done 15:32:27 INFO : got to setupCdrom without a CD device 15:32:29 INFO : setting language tp en_US.UTF-8 15:32:29 INFO : 53 keymaps are available [flashing cursor] Since this has been passed to the kernel group a little more definition is in order. This is a recently purchased Gateway, GM5420, equipped with vista. I have added 2 Western Digital HD (320G each) for a total of 3 - 320 G drives. I am using a Dell flatscreen monitor. That should enable you to get the detailed specs on the cpu. It might be useful if the installation program said what it was missing. Pat PS: I have found that I can bring up the box on Knoppix. I am using the Penguin Sleuth Kit Version 1.0 Beta from www.linux-forensics.com. I am unable to use the lan connection or a flash drive to get things out. The CD-ROM/DVD will not eject. What I might be running into is the Digital Rights Management hardware? The Dmesg shows (since I can't directly bring it out): Linux version 2.4.20-xfs (root@Knoppix) (gcc version 2.95.4 20011002 (Debian prerelease)) #1 SMP MitM<E4>r 26 15:37:36 CET2003 It shows 4 cpus with 3 & 4 disabled. BIOS BUG. no explicit IRQ entries. using default mptable. Boots proceser 0 &1 All processors have done init_idle PCI:Using configuration type 1 PCI: Probing PCI hardware PCI: Unable to handle 64-bit address space for (three more times) Transparent bridge - Intel Corp. 82801BA/CA/SB PCI Brighe PCI Bios passed nonexisten PCI bus 0! (a bunch of times) isapnp: No Plug & Play device found PCI_IDE: unknown IDE controller on PCI bus 02 device 00. VID=11ab, DIO=6101 PCI_IDE: chipset revision 177 PCI_IDE: 100 native mode on irq 10 I had the same problem and found the following workaround. Try booting with: linux all-generic-ide I tried the above linux all-generic-ide and got some success. Somehow the box does not seem to be willing to accept Linux. I tried unplugging the windows disk, there being 2 other 320G disks, and loading that way. It would not permit the system to boot from the other disk. I tried to do a straigth up install on the primary disk, overwriting windows, and it came up with windows screens saying that Windows Vista needed repairing. I would have expected an install accepting all the basic options would overwrite Vista completely. But it did not. I am wondering if there is a starter package of vista that is on a chip on the board so that vista can start fast. Or have Microsoft found a way to prevent any other operating system on a board? Perhaps the architecture prevents the complete removal of vista. I am at a loss as to what is going on. I have always expected a repartitioned and formated disk to accept a new operating system. It's enought to get me paranoid about Gateway and Microsoft. Fedora apologizes that these issues have not been resolved yet. We're sorry it's taken so long for your bug to be properly triaged and acted on. We appreciate the time you took to report this issue and want to make sure no important bugs slip through the cracks. If you're currently running a version of Fedora Core between 1 and 6, please note that Fedora no longer maintains these releases. We strongly encourage you to upgrade to a current Fedora release. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer maintained and closing them. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle/EOL If this bug is still open against Fedora Core 1 through 6, thirty days from now, it will be closed 'WONTFIX'. If you can reporduce this bug in the latest Fedora version, please change to the respective version. If you are unable to do this, please add a comment to this bug requesting the change. Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled these issues to this point. The process we are following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again. And if you'd like to join the bug triage team to help make things better, check out http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers This bug is open for a Fedora version that is no longer maintained and will not be fixed by Fedora. Therefore we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen thus bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. |