Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
El 09/01/2011 16:31, Robert Heller escribió: The kernel itself is optimized for the i686 processor. It is possible to custom build a kernel for the i586, i486, or i386 if you really have a processor that old. What is the sense of optimize a kernel for i686 and then distribute most of packages for i386? For example in CentOS-5: kernel-2.6.18-194.el5.i686.rpm php-5.1.6-27.el5.i386.rpm httpd-2.2.3-43.el5.centos.i386.rpm mysql-server-5.0.77-4.el5_4.2.i386.rpm Regards, -- Santi Saez http://woop.es ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
At Mon, 10 Jan 2011 18:25:22 +0100 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: El 09/01/2011 16:31, Robert Heller escribió: The kernel itself is optimized for the i686 processor. It is possible to custom build a kernel for the i586, i486, or i386 if you really have a processor that old. What is the sense of optimize a kernel for i686 and then distribute most of packages for i386? Most packages don't actualy do anything where process-specific optimizations would make any noticable differences. Note: glibc itself is optimized for i686 and since just about all programs use glibc, they would all get this advantage. Optimizing the kernel not only relates to generic speed, etc. advantages but also a pile of kernel-level 'features' the newer procossors provide (stuff involving process scheduling, virtual memory management, and I/O / DMA addressing / processing). These various kernel-level 'features' are not accessable by user-mode processes, so adding in those features / instructions is not meaningful for user-mode code (most packages). For example in CentOS-5: kernel-2.6.18-194.el5.i686.rpm php-5.1.6-27.el5.i386.rpm httpd-2.2.3-43.el5.centos.i386.rpm mysql-server-5.0.77-4.el5_4.2.i386.rpm Regards, -- Santi Saez http://woop.es ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/ () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
On Jan 10, 2011, at 11:25 AM, Santi Saez wrote: El 09/01/2011 16:31, Robert Heller escribió: The kernel itself is optimized for the i686 processor. It is possible to custom build a kernel for the i586, i486, or i386 if you really have a processor that old. What is the sense of optimize a kernel for i686 and then distribute most of packages for i386? For example in CentOS-5: kernel-2.6.18-194.el5.i686.rpm php-5.1.6-27.el5.i386.rpm httpd-2.2.3-43.el5.centos.i386.rpm mysql-server-5.0.77-4.el5_4.2.i386.rpm Most packages don't necessarily require the extra instructions in the 686. Routines like glibc, which are linked in at runtime, do get compiled for the 686. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] latest kernel - version question
Hi List, just doing my weekly yum update and noticed that the kernel is designated .i686 but the headers package is .i386?? surely the headers should match the kernel geometry that it was compiled for? confused. TIA Rob attachment: rkampen.vcf___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 09:31:19 -0500 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: Hi List, just doing my weekly yum update and noticed that the kernel is designated .i686 but the headers package is .i386?? surely the headers should match the kernel geometry that it was compiled for? confused. The headers package contains no compiled code -- it only contains source code (.h files). As such it is processor netural. It really could be '.noarch', but the version of rpmbuild shipped with CentOS 5.5 does not allow the creation of .noarch sub-packages packages. The kernel itself is optimized for the i686 processor. It is possible to custom build a kernel for the i586, i486, or i386 if you really have a processor that old. TIA Rob begin:vcard fn:Rob Kampen n:Kampen;Rob org:Keller Williams Classic Realty adr:;;13019 Water Point Blvd;Windermere;FL;34786;USA email;internet:rkam...@reaching-clients.com tel;work:407-876-4108 tel;fax:407-876-3591 tel;home:407-876-4854 tel;cell:407-341-3815 note:LCAM CPM Candidate url:www.robkampen.com version:2.1 end:vcard MIME-Version: 1.0 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/ () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote:
At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 09:31:19 -0500 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
Hi List,
just doing my weekly yum update and noticed that the kernel is
designated .i686 but the headers package is .i386??
surely the headers should match the kernel geometry that it was compiled
for?
confused.
The headers package contains no compiled code -- it only contains
source code (.h files). As such it is processor netural. It really
could be '.noarch', but the version of rpmbuild shipped with CentOS 5.5
does not allow the creation of .noarch sub-packages packages.
This will work in RHEL 6/CentOS 6. The cutesiness needed to provide
such packages in .noarch for more recent releases, and .%{arch} for
older releases, is already in a lot of the upstream RHEL and EPEL
packages.
The kernel itself is optimized for the i686 processor. It is possible
to custom build a kernel for the i586, i486, or i386 if you really have
a processor that old.
And highly, highly recommended to use a kernel optimized for i686 if
that's your real architecture: there's a big performance difference.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
On 01/09/11 11:09 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: And highly, highly recommended to use a kernel optimized for i686 if that's your real architecture: there's a big performance difference. since the last mainstream i586 CPU was the original Pentium (60-133Mhz) and Pentium/MMX (up to 200Mhz?), and everything since Pentium Pro, including Pentium-II and newer, has been i686, its a no brainer. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 11:19:22 -0800 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: On 01/09/11 11:09 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: And highly, highly recommended to use a kernel optimized for i686 if that's your real architecture: there's a big performance difference. since the last mainstream i586 CPU was the original Pentium (60-133Mhz) and Pentium/MMX (up to 200Mhz?), and everything since Pentium Pro, including Pentium-II and newer, has been i686, its a no brainer. Don't forget AMD's K6 processors -- these are also i586 processors. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/ () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
On 01/09/2011 03:31 PM, Robert Heller wrote: The headers package contains no compiled code -- it only contains source code (.h files). As such it is processor netural. It really could be '.noarch', but the version of rpmbuild shipped with CentOS 5.5 does not allow the creation of .noarch sub-packages packages. Are you sure the kernel-headers should be noarch ? They are extracted from a prep'd tree that has arch specific info included in there.. - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
On Jan 9, 2011, at 10:31 AM, Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote: At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 09:31:19 -0500 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: Hi List, just doing my weekly yum update and noticed that the kernel is designated .i686 but the headers package is .i386?? surely the headers should match the kernel geometry that it was compiled for? confused. The headers package contains no compiled code -- it only contains source code (.h files). As such it is processor netural. It really could be '.noarch', but the version of rpmbuild shipped with CentOS 5.5 does not allow the creation of .noarch sub-packages packages. The kernel itself is optimized for the i686 processor. It is possible to custom build a kernel for the i586, i486, or i386 if you really have a processor that old. Thanks I like to learn and this helps. TIA Rob begin:vcard fn:Rob Kampen n:Kampen;Rob org:Keller Williams Classic Realty adr:;;13019 Water Point Blvd;Windermere;FL;34786;USA email;internet:rkam...@reaching-clients.com tel;work:407-876-4108 tel;fax:407-876-3591 tel;home:407-876-4854 tel;cell:407-341-3815 note:LCAM CPM Candidate url:www.robkampen.com version:2.1 end:vcard MIME-Version: 1.0 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/ () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
On Sun, 9 Jan 2011 14:54:21 -0500 Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote: At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 11:19:22 -0800 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: On 01/09/11 11:09 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: And highly, highly recommended to use a kernel optimized for i686 if that's your real architecture: there's a big performance difference. since the last mainstream i586 CPU was the original Pentium (60-133Mhz) and Pentium/MMX (up to 200Mhz?), and everything since Pentium Pro, including Pentium-II and newer, has been i686, its a no brainer. Don't forget AMD's K6 processors -- these are also i586 processors. I have an AMD K6 that won't boot Fedora 7 (or later) due to missing some bit of architecture (I forget specifics, sorry...). So I suspect it's not truly an i586 processor? (fwiw, It did boot and install Linux Mint 9, LXDE however.) I didn't know the difference 10 years ago when I bought it, though it had Win98 installed which was fine back then... Now it's barely adequate as a print server. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Cia Watson ciama...@my180.net wrote: On Sun, 9 Jan 2011 14:54:21 -0500 Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote: At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 11:19:22 -0800 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: On 01/09/11 11:09 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: And highly, highly recommended to use a kernel optimized for i686 if that's your real architecture: there's a big performance difference. since the last mainstream i586 CPU was the original Pentium (60-133Mhz) and Pentium/MMX (up to 200Mhz?), and everything since Pentium Pro, including Pentium-II and newer, has been i686, its a no brainer. Don't forget AMD's K6 processors -- these are also i586 processors. I have an AMD K6 that won't boot Fedora 7 (or later) due to missing some bit of architecture (I forget specifics, sorry...). So I suspect it's not truly an i586 processor? (fwiw, It did boot and install Linux Mint 9, LXDE however.) I didn't know the difference 10 years ago when I bought it, though it had Win98 installed which was fine back then... Now it's barely adequate as a print server. You've my sympathies. You may need to build and test with a separately built PXE compatible kernel with the right architectures: modified initrd should be fairly easy. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] latest kernel - version question
Don't forget AMD's K6 processors -- these are also i586 processors. I have an AMD K6 that won't boot Fedora 7 (or later) due to missing some bit of architecture (I forget specifics, sorry...). So I suspect it's not truly an i586 processor? (fwiw, It did boot and install Linux Mint 9, LXDE however.) I didn't know the difference 10 years ago when I bought it, though it had Win98 installed which was fine back then... Now it's barely adequate as a print server. My last attempt to run a later kernel on a 586 or older was with EL 3. But if the system was rebuilt, it lost the updated native threads introduced in 3 (RH 9). The GLIBC apparently required a 686 or later to support it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
