“upstream Testing”??

Home » CentOS » “upstream Testing”??
CentOS 5 Comments

[Follow-ups set to gmane.linux.CentOS.general]

My wife had been running CentOS 6.4 almost since its inception; then her PC broke down.

We got a PC from System76, and Ubuntu turned out utterly unsuitable for us, as expected — as bad
for us as Gnome3. (I had previously bought a System76
net book (starling iirc), and immediately installed the then current Fedora; all has been well with that.

This time, alas!, I thought I should let her try Ubuntu;
so I tried running it myself for an houror two to get it set up and tweaked.

I couldn’t even find any of the apps I wanted to tweak!
So I put in an install disk for CentOS, and rebooted.

It never came near finishing the reboot. Up popped the following:

Detected CPU family 6 model 94.

Warning: Intel CPU model — this hardware has not
undergone upstream testing. Please see

http://wiki.CentOS.org/FAQ for more information.

tsc: Fast TSC calibration failed.

I have consulted that FAQ and more, and also System76’s. I’ve consulted and tried more other things than most of you likely want to hear about. No joy.

I’ve also tried rebooting without any install disk, with a Fedora install disk, with various helps such as super grub disk, and finally even with DBAN.

The machine doesn’t even find any of those. On any reboot, it just goes to that CentOS error message, and stops.

I’ve also googled for ‘”upstream testing” hardware’

Any thoughts or experience??.

5 thoughts on - “upstream Testing”??

  • Am 07.02.2016 um 22:00 schrieb Bear Tooth:

    Did you try adding to the kernel line the parameter “clocksource=tsm” or
    “clocksource

  • Just a thought, but maybe try doing the “Unetbootin/.ISO file build” on another pc / laptop and attempt booting from the USB instead of a CD?
    Just my thoughts on the matter. Its something I would do just to get the OS installed, then I’d worry about the upstream stuff afterwards…perhaps after the install and a tremendous system-wide upgrade, things might look a little better? PLUS she’d at least have the OS on her machine….I’m just sayin’ LoL!

    EGO II

  • Which System76 model? How is the install media created? Presumably it’s a USB stick, but how is it being created?

    The easiest and most reliable is to use dd. Livecd-tools is also reliable but has a number of options required to boot UEFi systems. LiveUSB Creator should work. Everything else is prone to failure.

    CentOS 6.4 is kinda old for new hardware. You’re better off looking at CentOS 7.1.

    Chris Murphy

  • what version of CentOS was this? you previously mentioned 6.4, thats like 3-4 updates behind the current 6.7

    model 94, thats a Core Ix-6xxx which is the brand new Skylake processor, lotta hardware changes on those, you likely will need the
    /newest/ version of the kernel for any given release for it to work, specifically 7.2 (1511) is the first version to support Skylake, and there may still be issues with the on-chip graphics as they are quite new.

  • Specifically, but not limited to, unetbootin. Really, people need to just purge unetbootin from memory and stop recommending it. I’ve never had it work on any (U)EFI system. And more often than not it would fail to create media even for BIOS systems. Also, it’s not supported at all on Fedora, I seriously doubt it’s supported by CentOS or Red Hat. Just use dd, and accept the obliteration of the USB stick. That’s easy and safe.

    Future talk. There’s a rewrite happening on the Fedora side for LiveUSB Creator that will initially use dd on the backend. I’ll guess that it’ll still accept being pointed to a local ISO. There’s some talk about it hopefully being more modular so it can be “branded” by different distros and hence more widely used, maintained, and reliable.

LEAVE A COMMENT