Re: architecture kernel problems

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 13:35 +0000, James Wilkinson wrote:
> Les wrote:
> > I don't know what you are working on Mike, but if it helps, I installed
> > to a 433Mhz celeron with the i386 package and when I ran that command I
> > got:
> > kernel-2.6.18-1.2798.fc6.i586
> > kernel-2.6.18-1.2849.fc6.i586
> > kernel-devel-2.6.18-1.2798.fc6.i586
> > kernel-devel-2.6.18-1.2849.fc6.i586
> > kernel-headers-2.6.18-1.2849.fc6.i386
> > 
> > I was sort of expecting them all to say i386???  Maybe someone can help
> > us understand what's happening.
> 
> i586 will work, but an i686 kernel will work slightly better on a
> Celeron.
> 
> The basic 32 bit set of instructions that x86 Linux uses were introduced
> with the Intel i386 back in 1986. Later Intel processors added extra
> instructions to help in specific cases. (Later on, various "multimedia"
> instructions were also added, but that's a separate discussion.)
> 
> Most user-space programs don't actually need or gain from those extra
> instructions. So Fedora compiles most programs using only i386
> instructions -- hence the "i386" in most package names.
> 
> Some packages (the kernel and glibc, for example) *can* make use of the
> extra instructions. So Fedora provides an i686 version of those
> packages, which do use the extra instructions. Unfortunately, there are
> still some processors which don't support the i686 level of instructions
> (Via only recently started supporting them, and AMD K6s are still used).
> For these processors, Fedora provides an i586 version. (i586
> instructions are still better than just the i386 instruction set in
> these cases).
> 
> i586 programs will work on later processors, but i586 processors don't
> know how to handle i686 instructions. (If they did, they'd be i686
> processors).
> 
> I'm not sure whether the kernel headers actually contain *any*
> instructions -- if they do, they'd be tiny portions of assembler. They
> don't use processor-specific instructions, so count as i386.
> 
Thanks, James, 

	I didn't know that the 686 stuff would run OK on the celeron, thus my
choice of the 386 pkg.  Since I see so much about the issues of 64 bit
still being not quite fully implemented, I will probably stay where I am
until 64 bit is fully running (I am assuming that 686 is 64 bit).

	I have mucked up my installation a bit already and a reinstall may be
imminent if I can't figure this out today.  My ultimate goal is to drive
a dual processor dual core system with 64 bit capability for some
software I had been working on (I need more flops to make it useful).  I
really like the opterons and have been following the progress people are
making with those systems.  I hope one of them will summarize their work
soon, and the state of the whole system would be helpful.  Although I do
know networking pretty well at the microlevel (protocols, packets,
hardware etc.) and programming at a sort of Roads scholar doctorate
level  (no degree, but lots of classes and 30 years experience:
microcode to high level languages for real time applications and
component test), I am a bit of a lightweight on system install and
config stuff.  So for me, a step by step install guide will get me where
I need to be, and that appears rare.  Also I was surprised to find
packages installed in the "lib" directory.  I have expected them to be
in a /usr/local directory or something like that.  I am a bit of a
structure nut when it comes to systems, although you would not guess it
when you see my computer room (messy is too polite).

Regards,
Les H


[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux