SI Reasoning wrote: > --- tester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Do you have any idea how many people submitted bug >>reports bexcause APIC >>was off and their machines would not boot the >>installer? Almost >>everyone with multiprocessors and more than 2 IDE >>channels. >> >>Obviously we are trying to see what the effects are >>each way, and there >>might be an alternate install image, but the problem >>is that people >>never look for those. >> >> > > At least we know where the problems are. If there are > no other major issues then it sounds like it should be > enabled for the smp kernel. Hoever, more than 2 ide's > is not as standard as a laptop and I think it should > be disabled in the standard kernel. This looks like > something that may be best setup as a module at some > point. > It _is_ enabled in the SMP kernel but it is also a UP kernel to install with and it strill fails.
As a matter of fact our failure rate on laptops is very high, APIC or not. That is because there are a lot of dodges employed by laptop makers and compatibility with standards is restored by software they write for windows. If you have ever tried to install windows on any laptop without the restore disk or restore CD, you know well of what I speak. And the particular one you speak of is best served by an alternate install kernel and an alternate running kernel because there is a huge BIOS bug as well. Try to run kernel 2.4 from anyone with 512M of RAM and you will see "bad bridge mapping" errors. The APIC error is also a BIOS bug--have seen it before on an inspiron that was trying everything to run kernel 2.4 with 512M. He ended up running kernel 2.2 and writing to Dell. Civileme
