LinuxQuestions.org
Go Job Hunting at the LQ Job Marketplace
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
 
LinkBack Search this Thread
Old 09-03-2009, 07:37 PM   #1
nardthefox
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 4

Rep: Reputation: 0
Unbuntu 9.04 Installation - unable to boot due to i686 comp. instead of 86x64?


I am a super newbie just trying to load up my first Linux platforms and have only made it to properly burning my iso's for ubuntu 9.04 and linux mint 7, both desktop non-64bit versions.

However, I am unable to get past the live disc main screen upon start up, as I keep receiving a roughly similar error message:
"Unable to boot from Cd due to a required 86x64 PC. This PC is i686 and requires the proper kernel."
At this point, this is Greek to me.

I'm running this system:
3.00 gigahertz Intel Pentium 4
NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT
1 GB RAM

Last edited by nardthefox; 09-04-2009 at 12:00 AM. Reason: Computer specifications added
 
Old 09-03-2009, 07:42 PM   #2
joeBuffer
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2009
Distribution: Ubuntu 9.04
Posts: 325

Rep: Reputation: 42
Going by the message, you downloaded and burned the 64-bit version of the .iso and you should be using the 32-bit version...
I would think that for Mint you would want the Main (or Universal or Light) Edition, and that for Ubuntu you would want the 32bit version.

Last edited by joeBuffer; 09-03-2009 at 08:03 PM.
 
Old 09-03-2009, 11:47 PM   #3
nardthefox
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 4

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
I'm not sure why I would need the 32 bit version, though. This is a brand new computer with some pretty decent specs on it, so I'm confused as to why it would only be capable of the 32bit over the 64bit optimization.
 
Old 09-04-2009, 12:26 AM   #4
linuxlover.chaitanya
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Location: Nagpur, India
Distribution: Cent OS 5/6, Ubuntu Server 10.04
Posts: 4,615

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Even if the computer is new but if the architecture is old you would need 32 bit kernel. I do not know if Pentium 4 processor was 64 bit.
It is better to start off with a 32 bit kernel. 64 bit processor will run this kernel as well.
 
Old 09-04-2009, 01:04 AM   #5
foodown
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 607

Rep: Reputation: 218Reputation: 218Reputation: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxlover.chaitanya View Post
I do not know if Pentium 4 processor was 64 bit.
The Pentium 4 was definitely not 64-bit. I do not believe that any "brand new" computers have included them for at least three years. Intel didn't stop making them altogether until last year, though, so who knows.

But yes, definitely 32-bit.

3GHz, 1GB RAM, GeForce 7600 . . . definitely beefy enough to run any 32-bit distro really, really well.

Plus, 32-bit isn't "bad" in any way. It's just different from 64-bit. There are lots of brand new CPUs which are still 32-bit.

A note: later variants of the Pentium 4, the "Gallatin" and "Prescott 2M" "Extreme Editions" were released with a limited, early x86_64 instruction set. I do not know, but I doubt that x86_64 Linux would support these architectures. x86_64 versions of the seventh generation or "NetBurst" Intel architectures were not 100% compatible with the AMD x86_64 architecture, which actually became the standard. I'm not sure that anything predating a "Conroe" Intel chip would be supported.

But, yeah . . . based on the error message, yours is 32-bit.

Last edited by foodown; 09-04-2009 at 01:42 AM.
 
Old 09-04-2009, 01:11 AM   #6
linuxlover.chaitanya
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Location: Nagpur, India
Distribution: Cent OS 5/6, Ubuntu Server 10.04
Posts: 4,615

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
OP, this is the confirmation that your system is definitely not a brand new and you need a 32bit kernel.
 
Old 09-04-2009, 04:24 AM   #7
nardthefox
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 4

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Okie dokie! Thanks for that! So where can I dig up the definite 32bit download? I used the main Ubuntu site download for 32bit, but it gave this problem. Do I need to do the alternate.iso? And can I run that alternate.iso in Live CD mode? I'd like to get more comfortable with the platform before changing over entirely, ya know?
 
Old 09-04-2009, 05:04 AM   #8
Wim Sturkenboom
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Roodepoort, South Africa
Distribution: Slackware 10.1/10.2/12, Ubuntu 12.04, Crunchbang Statler
Posts: 3,786

Rep: Reputation: 282Reputation: 282Reputation: 282
Alternate CD does not run in live mode. And I guess that you by accident downloaded the incorrect version.
 
Old 09-04-2009, 05:14 AM   #9
linuxlover.chaitanya
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Location: Nagpur, India
Distribution: Cent OS 5/6, Ubuntu Server 10.04
Posts: 4,615

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
http://www.ubuntu.com/GetUbuntu/download Get the Ubuntu here and select 32bit as download. This option is at round the bottom of the page. Though 32bit is the default cross check it before beginning the download. And also check the mdsum after the download is complete just to verify the integrity of the image.
 
Old 09-05-2009, 10:48 AM   #10
nardthefox
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 4

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Solved

Hey fellas,
Thanks for the help! I did accidently download the 32bit to a different source folder and reburned the damned 64bit a second time...took a bit of offline double checking to realize my error. Though this Live CD doesn't run it's Live CD Ubuntu, it's alright...the full installation is what I am writing you from now, so fortunately, everything is working great! All the help is greatly appreciated!
 
Old 09-07-2009, 01:17 AM   #11
linuxlover.chaitanya
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Location: Nagpur, India
Distribution: Cent OS 5/6, Ubuntu Server 10.04
Posts: 4,615

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Good to hear you have done it. If you think that it has solved your problem, you can mark the thread as solved. This will help other members coming here for the same problem.
 
  


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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Unable to boot due to changes in fstab Covel Linux - General 4 12-09-2010 04:18 PM
Dual Boot Unbuntu and Windows XP (Unbuntu Installed First). Mad4Macintosh Linux - Newbie 16 03-20-2009 10:37 AM
Unable to boot server due to APF firewall jokingelephant Linux - Server 1 01-29-2009 08:55 PM
Fedora 8 installation fail due to ISOFS: Unable to identify CD-ROM format centguy Linux - Hardware 14 12-27-2008 01:01 AM
*URGENT! Unable to boot into linux due to NTFS drive The_Nerd Linux - General 3 07-15-2007 04:31 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:43 AM.

Main Menu
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
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration