[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Herbert Xu) writes:
kernel where all options were compiled into separate modules so simply
choosing the right modules constructs the optimal kernel.
Guess what, that's how the current 2.4 kernel images are constructed.
Well, not really. All of the drivers and other
Herbert == Herbert Xu [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Herbert Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Confusion: Adding 8 (or whatever it is) variations of each
kernel version is going to make it harder to select the
appropriate one. There is some fraction of the target audience
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 09:19:56AM -0700, David Schleef wrote:
It could also be useful as a hardware tester at install time:
Would you like to test your hardware (and get a kernel custom
build for your hardware at the same time)? This process will
potentially take a long time. (Yes, I
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thats fine if you have already booted Linux. However, if you are
reading the installation instructions (as what Steve was saying), then
you probably do not have a Linux system yet.
Whats the point of finding out what the correct kernel is only after
you
Sam Hartman writes (Formal request for review: [Sam Hartman [EMAIL
PROTECTED]] Referring what kernel-images to build to the technical
committee?):
Hi. I posted the following message to debian-devel last night and
have received agreement with the summary and apparently (it was not
explicitly
David Schleef [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 26 April 2001 09:05, Andreas Metzler wrote:
_Afair_ it is necessary to run a k6 (or athlon) optimized kernel to
use 3DNow! in applications like xmms or lame. This probably applys to
ISSE, MTTR and MMX, too.
This is not correct.
[snip]
On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 08:00:49PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 09:19:56AM -0700, David Schleef wrote:
It could also be useful as a hardware tester at install time:
Would you like to test your hardware (and get a kernel custom
build for your hardware at the same time)?
In fact, most of the options could be auto-detected from
/proc/cpuinfo.
It could also be useful as a hardware tester at install time:
Would you like to test your hardware (and get a kernel custom
build for your hardware at the same time)? This process will
potentially take a long time. (Yes, I
Otto Wyss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even if your idea sounds a little bit crazy, this is probably the best
way at the moment to get a well suited kernel. But I'd rather see a
kernel where all options were compiled into separate modules so simply
choosing the right modules constructs the
Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Summary: Herbert has started building 8 different flavors of
kernel-image for i386. These flavors correspond to CPU type; for
example there is an appropriate kernel for people with 386 machines to
run and an appropriate kernel for people with Athlon
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 12:58:10PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 08:30:31PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
[...]
i think you've done a good job of summarising the issues.
I agree as well.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu
On Thursday 26 April 2001 09:05, Andreas Metzler wrote:
performance: By having images optimized for each processor on i386
users should see better performance. I don't believe performance
numbers were quantified in the discussion but quantifying performance
is probably important to
RC There is no need for a MTTR specific kernel. MTTR is not really
RC needed as there is no software written which is unable to run
RC without it. Our goal here should be compatibility with software.
RC MTTR can increase speed significantly in certain situations, but
RC there's lots of other
On Thursday 26 April 2001 16:38, Ilya Martynov wrote:
RC There is no need for a MTTR specific kernel. MTTR is not really
RC needed as there is no software written which is unable to run
RC without it. Our goal here should be compatibility with software.
RC MTTR can increase speed
RC I've played many AVI files without MTRR support. It will still
RC work, just a bit slower.
I think it depends on configuration. On my home PC aviplay is almost
unusable without MTRR. It looks like slide show instead movie. aviplay
docs mention that some people reported up to x3 increase in
On 04/26/2001 09:59:13 AM Russell Coker wrote:
On Thursday 26 April 2001 16:38, Ilya Martynov wrote:
RC There is no need for a MTTR specific kernel. MTTR is not really
RC needed as there is no software written which is unable to run
RC without it. Our goal here should be compatibility
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:15:15PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
On Thursday 26 April 2001 09:05, Andreas Metzler wrote:
_Afair_ it is necessary to run a k6 (or athlon) optimized kernel to
use 3DNow! in applications like xmms or lame. This probably applys to
ISSE, MTTR and MMX, too.
This is
Good summary, Sam. I'd like to add a couple extra points:
On 25-Apr-01, 19:30 (CDT), Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Should build custom: Some argumed that users should build a custom
kernel and the distribution was doing them a disservice by trying to
provide kernels that met their
] (kernel-image-i386 maintainer),
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (concerned about package size)
Subject: Referring what kernel-images to build to the technical committee?
Reply-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
From: Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Resent-Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Resent-From: debian-devel
On Thursday 26 April 2001 18:19, David Schleef wrote:
For 3DNow! we should have a kernel which supports it.
All kernels, even if compiled with CONFIG_M386, will support
MMX and 3DNow. It just won't use memcpy_mmx() or memcpy_3d()
as the implementation of memcpy(). The important part is
] (kernel-image-i386 maintainer),
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (concerned about package size)
Subject: Referring what kernel-images to build to the technical committee?
Reply-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
From: Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Resent-Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Resent-From: debian-devel
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 10:13:01PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
So a 386 compiled kernel can still support MMX, 3DNow! and MTRR? In that
case we only need a 386 kernel, but it might be nice to have a PentiumMMX
compiled kernel as well (that should give better performance on all brands of
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Confusion: Adding 8 (or whatever it is) variations of each kernel
version is going to make it harder to select the appropriate one. There
is some fraction of the target audience who won't know what kind of CPU
they have, and we don't want to have to
Previously Herbert Xu wrote:
There is a file called /proc/cpuinfo you know.
And /proc/hardware on some architectures.
Wichert.
--
/ Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:59:13PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
If programs won't run at all (as in the case of MMX and 3DNow!)
then we should compile different kernels. If they just don't run as fast
then we can let the users compile their own kernels.
I don't understand why MMX or 3dnow
[cc list is an attempt at stakeholders for this issue. If I missed
people, I'm sorry. If I annoyed people by ccing them even though they
read the list, well I'm sorry too, but there are a fair number of
people who tend to want to be explicitly cc'd when an issue pertains
to them.]
Summary:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 08:30:31PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
[...]
i think you've done a good job of summarising the issues.
i hope we can resolve this soon.
craig
--
craig sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GnuPG Key: 1024D/CD5626F0
Key fingerprint: 9674 7EE2 4AC6 F5EF 3C57 52C3 EC32 6810
27 matches
Mail list logo
