Re: Building new intel nocona machine with debian....
EATX is the size of the mainboard, its 12 x 13. From memory the Thermaltake Xaser III should be large enough to house a board of that size but check up the specs of the exact model you're after before you buy just to make sure. You shouldn't have problems with the heatsink mounting, the only thing would be to try and get the largest (deepest) possible case you can find. Alot of Nocona motherboards follow the SSI spec which places the processor close to the front of the chassis, the heatsink may come into contact with your optical drives. I have yet to try Debian AMD64 on Nocona haven't had the time :( Ben Bill wrote: This is actually not really the right newsgroup for this post (I have already tried hardware newsgroups, but none seem centered on the x86-64) That being said I am certain someone here has had experience with something at least close to this situation. I would very much like to build a Supermicro X6DHE-XG2 motherboard computer with dual Xeon processorsthese are apparently clones of the AMD Opteron (except for missing certain proprietary chip instruction sets)I plan to run Debian AMD64 on these systems eventually, however the real question I have is unfortunately, far more primitive, which is simply can I build these machines with standard cases (what is Extended ATX) , I am thinking of the Thermaltake Xaser III, will this support the heatsink?
Re: Success report: installing pure64 on a dell poweredge 1850
Apparently the 2.8GHz nocona is slower than the 1.8GHz Opteron. Compiled with 'make CC=gcc-3.4'. BYTEmark* Native Mode Benchmark ver. 2 (10/95) Index-split by Andrew D. Balsa (11/97) Linux/Unix* port by Uwe F. Mayer (12/96,11/97) TEST: Iterations/sec. : Old Index : New Index : : Pentium 90* : AMD K6/233* :--:-: NUMERIC SORT: 1403.8 : 36.00 : 11.82 STRING SORT : 161.06 : 71.96 : 11.14 BITFIELD: 3.6503e+08 : 62.62 : 13.08 FP EMULATION: 133.76 : 64.18 : 14.81 FOURIER : 15532 : 17.66 : 9.92 ASSIGNMENT : 19.076 : 72.59 : 18.83 IDEA: .3 : 50.98 : 15.14 HUFFMAN : 1372.3 : 38.05 : 12.15 NEURAL NET : 25.598 : 41.12 : 17.30 LU DECOMPOSITION: 944.64 : 48.94 : 35.34 ==ORIGINAL BYTEMARK RESULTS== INTEGER INDEX : 54.706 FLOATING-POINT INDEX: 32.879 Baseline (MSDOS*) : Pentium* 90, 256 KB L2-cache, Watcom* compiler 10.0 ==LINUX DATA BELOW=== CPU : Dual AuthenticAMD AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 244 1793MHz L2 Cache: 1024 KB OS : Linux 2.6.7-5-amd64-k8-smp C compiler : gcc-3.4 libc: ld-2.3.2.so MEMORY INDEX: 13.998 INTEGER INDEX : 13.397 FLOATING-POINT INDEX: 18.236 Baseline (LINUX): AMD K6/233*, 512 KB L2-cache, gcc 2.7.2.3, libc-5.4.38 * Trademarks are property of their respective holder. -- Karl Hegbloom (o_ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] //\ jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V_/_ yahoo:karlheg
Re: Success report: installing pure64 on a dell poweredge 1850
Uuuuh Yes...finally a pissing contest... My CPU is faster than yours -- .O. Scream, Scream like the silence of the bits. ..O Dead lies the flag by the feet of the cold one. OOO Freedom WILL break the walls of mammon. pgpfqzvKuz6t7.pgp Description: PGP signature
mplayer e w32codecs
The w32codecs is avaiable only as binary... before destroy an amd62 box with strange experiment I would ask you if somebody has tested mplayer+w32codecs on amd64 box... Any (positive) experiences? -- Sythos - http://www.sythos.net () ASCII Ribbon Campaign - against html/rtf/vCard in mail /\- against M$ attachments
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 05:59 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: Dirk H. Schulz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [snip] You need 64bit address space inside the kernel. I386 has some hacks to make this work up to 64GB ram on some hardware and I don't know if amd64 cpus and motherboards can work the same way. The extra work needed for the hacks makes this slower though. I'd say hack is a strong word for PAE, which is just an extension of the segmented memory concept. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B In America, only the successful writer is important, in France all writers are important, in England no writer is important, and in Australia you have to explain what a writer is. Geoffrey Cottrell signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Success report: installing pure64 on a dell poweredge 1850
On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 23:16 -0700, Karl Hegbloom wrote: Apparently the 2.8GHz nocona is slower than the 1.8GHz Opteron. Intel got a lot of DEC engineers when it bought the Alpha from Compaq. Maybe they couldn't stand the thought of working for The Evil Empire, and joined the Rebellion? -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B Peace won by compromise is usually a short-lived achievement. Winfield Scott (?) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: mplayer e w32codecs
hi. I tryed to use w32codecs on amd64 later. but mplayer says w3scodecs is for x86_32. it don't support x86_64. so I thinks it can't use for amd64 my think.. Can we use windows codec for WindowsXP 64bit. is it supporting amd64? but just my think... i didn't try it. how about your think? On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 09:21:30AM +0200, Sythos wrote: The w32codecs is avaiable only as binary... before destroy an amd62 box with strange experiment I would ask you if somebody has tested mplayer+w32codecs on amd64 box... Any (positive) experiences? -- Sythos - http://www.sythos.net () ASCII Ribbon Campaign - against html/rtf/vCard in mail /\- against M$ attachments -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mplayer e w32codecs
Hi, You can run mplayer inside an ia32 chroot. It works for me. Zoltan On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 12:01:28 +0200, Sythos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 05:35:03PM +0900, Kim Dong-ju wrote: how about your think? libavcodec don't support RP e QT, but fully support divx, xvid, mpeg4...(the team say this) Any experiences? -- Sythos - http://www.sythos.net () ASCII Ribbon Campaign - against html/rtf/vCard in mail /\- against M$ attachments -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mplayer e w32codecs
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 12:09:06PM +0200, Zoltan Varga wrote: You can run mplayer inside an ia32 chroot. It works for me. Zoltan too much simple in this way :) I want to view mplayer decode a DVD or Divx, write how can do this and share info. Only 64bit is better than 32bit chroot -- Sythos - http://www.sythos.net () ASCII Ribbon Campaign - against html/rtf/vCard in mail /\- against M$ attachments
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 02:29:09AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: I'd say hack is a strong word for PAE, which is just an extension of the segmented memory concept. I think intel's messy segmented memory model is quite a hack. At least with the 386 in protected mode you could treat memory as flat (except for that hole at 640 to 1024k, but you could just start at 1M and forget about it). With PAE now you are back to having segments and mapping and such going on again. Having done a bit mf programing at the OS level on a 486, I sure felt like intel's memory segments were a hack, which even made the pagetables in protected mode somewhat messy to create. Len Sorensen
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 08:23 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 02:29:09AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: I'd say hack is a strong word for PAE, which is just an extension of the segmented memory concept. I think intel's messy segmented memory model is quite a hack. At least with the 386 in protected mode you could treat memory as flat (except for that hole at 640 to 1024k, but you could just start at 1M and forget about it). With PAE now you are back to having segments and mapping and such going on again. Having done a bit mf programing at the OS level on a 486, I sure felt like intel's memory segments were a hack, which even made the pagetables in protected mode somewhat messy to create. Back when segments were 16 bits wide, yes it was a pain. I'm old enough to have done assembly programming on the 8088. (Now that I have the wisdom of time, I understand why Intel did what they did, even though the 68K was much cleaner.) Now (actually since the 386), though, the segments are 32 bits wide, and the need to manipulate segments has migrated into the kernel, while each userland app sees a 32 bit address space. To me, that's an acceptable compromise. In fact, it seems to me that *any* 32 bit processor (SPARC, HPPA, Power) that wants to be able to use more than 4GB of total RAM would have to use such a segmentation scheme. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B NAMBLA - Nat'l Assoc of Marlon Brando Look-Alikes (Yes, it's a South Park reference.) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
On Wednesday 08 September 2004 14:45, Ron Johnson wrote: In fact, it seems to me that *any* 32 bit processor (SPARC, HPPA, Power) that wants to be able to use more than 4GB of total RAM would have to use such a segmentation scheme. Err, all of the above have 64-bit variants. I don't know if the 32-bit variants support more than 4GB ram, but I doubt it. The 64-bit Power CPUs don't have a real 32-bit mode. They always operate on 64-bit registers. 32-bit code is executed by automatically sign- or zero-extending 32-bit memory loads, and certain instructions (eg. comparisons) ignore the top 32 bits. I suspect SPARC does something similar, I don't know about PARISC. Paul
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 15:03 +0100, Paul Brook wrote: On Wednesday 08 September 2004 14:45, Ron Johnson wrote: In fact, it seems to me that *any* 32 bit processor (SPARC, HPPA, Power) that wants to be able to use more than 4GB of total RAM would have to use such a segmentation scheme. Err, all of the above have 64-bit variants. Ye, but they didn't *start* with 64 bit variants. I don't know if the 32-bit variants support more than 4GB ram, but I doubt it. Oh come on. You think the SPARC32s, Powers PA-RISCs that ran big Solaris, AIX and HP-UX SMP boxen in big shops *never* had more than 4GB of RAM? I find it supremely hard to believe that Intel is the only company to have a 32 bit chip that can address more than 4GB of RAM. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B Sometime they'll give a war and nobody will come. Carl Sandburg Oh, come on. Sure they will. That's what testosterone is for... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
On Wednesday 08 September 2004 15:42, Ron Johnson wrote: On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 15:03 +0100, Paul Brook wrote: On Wednesday 08 September 2004 14:45, Ron Johnson wrote: In fact, it seems to me that *any* 32 bit processor (SPARC, HPPA, Power) that wants to be able to use more than 4GB of total RAM would have to use such a segmentation scheme. Err, all of the above have 64-bit variants. Ye, but they didn't *start* with 64 bit variants. Actually Power did. It was designed as a 64-bit architecture that can also be run/implemented with only 32-bits. I don't know if the 32-bit variants support more than 4GB ram, but I doubt it. Oh come on. You think the SPARC32s, Powers PA-RISCs that ran big Solaris, AIX and HP-UX SMP boxen in big shops *never* had more than 4GB of RAM? I find it supremely hard to believe that Intel is the only company to have a 32 bit chip that can address more than 4GB of RAM. Well, sparc64 has been around an awful long time. Adding PAE-like hacks seems a strange decision when you have backwards compatible 64-bit CPUs. Paul
Re: amd64 installation images
On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 04:38:00PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: If I get the idea correctly, this is what happens basically: 1) kernel and initrd get loaded 2) modules from initrd are loaded as far as they are needed to get additional software (packages, modules) from the net. Additional software is called a component afaik. Those are the udebs. Some components contain kernel modules like the disk drivers, others the programs to partition the disk or install base. 3) the installer starts and loads any modules needed to do the install (SCSI/SATA/PATA/whatever drivers primarily) from the net Actualy it installs the extra components containing the kernel modules and then a component with the full discover data file that then also runs discover again with all modules present. Ok, so one of the components needs to contain 3ware 9xxx drivers, as well as 7/8xxx. The head node of my cluster, which should be arriving RSN, has all its disks connected to the 3ware card. -- #define X(x,y) x##y Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X([EMAIL PROTECTED] , des.ca) The gods confound the man who first found out how to distinguish the hours! Confound him, too, who in this place set up a sundial, to cut and hack my day so wretchedly into small pieces! -- Plautus, 200 BC
Re: mplayer e w32codecs
Sythos wrote: libavcodec don't support RP e QT, but fully support divx, xvid, mpeg4...(the team say this) Any experiences? libavcodec indeed seems to work fine on a pure64 system. I had some troubles with xvid though. Initially it worked fine when encoding an mpeg2 movie, but it quickly crashed with a segfault (libavcodec encoding worked fine, so I suspect it was xvid). I now run it from an ia32 chroot... -- Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Don't see much difference between i386 vs amd64
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 03:07:29PM -0500, Stephen Waters wrote: The 69k can be an advantage as you only risk 69k worth of data instead of 2048k or more... Only misdesigned drives and defective OSs run with write caching enabled by default. Len Sorensen
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 16:18 +0100, Paul Brook wrote: On Wednesday 08 September 2004 15:42, Ron Johnson wrote: On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 15:03 +0100, Paul Brook wrote: On Wednesday 08 September 2004 14:45, Ron Johnson wrote: In fact, it seems to me that *any* 32 bit processor (SPARC, HPPA, Power) that wants to be able to use more than 4GB of total RAM would have to use such a segmentation scheme. Err, all of the above have 64-bit variants. Ye, but they didn't *start* with 64 bit variants. Actually Power did. It was designed as a 64-bit architecture that can also be run/implemented with only 32-bits. http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/jbayko/cpu5.html#Sec5Part4 Part IV: IBM RS/6000 POWER chips (1990). . . . Thirty two 32-bit registers were defined for the POWER1 integer unit, which also included certain string operations, as well as all load/store operations. Blah blah blah POWER2 It was superceded by the POWER3 (Early 1998), with eight functional units (two FPU, three integer (two single cycle, one multicycle), two load/store, and branch unit), but capable of operating at much higher clock speeds. In addition, a 64 bit version, the PowerPC A35 (Apache), was designed for the AS/400 E series So, the first 64 bit POWER chips arrived 8 years after the 32 bit versions. I don't know if the 32-bit variants support more than 4GB ram, but I doubt it. Oh come on. You think the SPARC32s, Powers PA-RISCs that ran big Solaris, AIX and HP-UX SMP boxen in big shops *never* had more than 4GB of RAM? I find it supremely hard to believe that Intel is the only company to have a 32 bit chip that can address more than 4GB of RAM. Well, sparc64 has been around an awful long time. Adding PAE-like hacks seems Since 1995. a strange decision when you have backwards compatible 64-bit CPUs. There were largish SMP SPARC32 boxen for many years before the SPARC64 came into existence. I can't find any references on the web, but some of those big boxen had to have more than 4GB RAM. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B Peace is a daily, a weekly, a monthly process, gradually changing opinions, slowly eroding old barriers, quietly building new structures. John F Kennedy signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: CDCEther support in network install?
Hello, On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 03:32:51PM +0200, Eugene San wrote: Recently i tried to install sid-amd64-monolithic.iso (07/09/04) and it seems that there is no support for CDCEther module while generic usbnet is present. Is there any solution? It would be nice for many Cable Internet users. all flavours, including the installer kernel, have following options set: CONFIG_USB_USBNET=m CONFIG_USB_CDCETHER=y the usbnet module is in the nic-usb-modules udeb. was the module loaded, or did you try loading it from hand? P.S. Why not to add debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/ to mirror list while it out of official mirrors? the sarge fork will have an installer pointing to the correct mirrors, but for pure64 we want to stay as close as possible to sid and not introduce temporary changes we will have to remove after sarge got released and pure64 was added to main. But it is indeed annoying... Kind regards Frederik Schueler -- ENOSIG
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 04:09:59PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/jbayko/cpu5.html#Sec5Part4 Part IV: IBM RS/6000 POWER chips (1990). . . . Thirty two 32-bit registers were defined for the POWER1 integer unit, which also included certain string operations, as well as all load/store operations. Blah blah blah POWER2 It was superceded by the POWER3 (Early 1998), with eight functional units (two FPU, three integer (two single cycle, one multicycle), two load/store, and branch unit), but capable of operating at much higher clock speeds. In addition, a 64 bit version, the PowerPC A35 (Apache), was designed for the AS/400 E series So, the first 64 bit POWER chips arrived 8 years after the 32 bit versions. 1998 seems like a fairly resonable time to start getting into 64bit. I guess it does indicate the power wasn't designed as 64bit to begin with, but seems to have been designed well enough that extending it later was reasonable to do. Well, sparc64 has been around an awful long time. Adding PAE-like hacks seems Since 1995. There were largish SMP SPARC32 boxen for many years before the SPARC64 came into existence. I can't find any references on the web, but some of those big boxen had to have more than 4GB RAM. I wonder how much 4GB ram would have cost in 1995 or even 1998. I remember getting 16M for a 486 for $600 in 1992. I think it was 1996 when I got 128M for about the same amount. The price lists I found once for Decstation 5000 boxes had ram listed at around $5 for 128M in 1991. Even in 1995 4GB would have been a rather expensive amount of ram even for a high end sparc or power machine. Len Sorensen
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 what about Alpha.. Alpha has been a 64bit since the begining: http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/jbayko/cpu5.html#Sec5Part5 - -ben Unix is user friendly, Its just picky about its friends. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBP33vflzKmtpiQEMRArqPAJ9ztkv+/Ea+GDXxcQfappm9dxHm8ACaAoxW DMELdkITSmcwwafmt3Ylm7g= =B8xy -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004, Lennart Sorensen wrote: On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 04:09:59PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/jbayko/cpu5.html#Sec5Part4 Part IV: IBM RS/6000 POWER chips (1990). . . . Thirty two 32-bit registers were defined for the POWER1 integer unit, which also included certain string operations, as well as all load/store operations. Blah blah blah POWER2 It was superceded by the POWER3 (Early 1998), with eight functional units (two FPU, three integer (two single cycle, one multicycle), two load/store, and branch unit), but capable of operating at much higher clock speeds. In addition, a 64 bit version, the PowerPC A35 (Apache), was designed for the AS/400 E series So, the first 64 bit POWER chips arrived 8 years after the 32 bit versions. 1998 seems like a fairly resonable time to start getting into 64bit. I guess it does indicate the power wasn't designed as 64bit to begin with, but seems to have been designed well enough that extending it later was reasonable to do. Ehm. There is no 64-bit version of the POWER ISA, it was extended/fixed/replaced by the PowerPC ISA which was designed with 32 and 64 bit implementations to begin with (I think). POWER3 is a ppc64 implementation selling under the POWER brand, not a 64-bit POWER implementation. Before the POWER3 (and other ppc64 implementations), the SMP rs6000 machines where 32-bit ppcs and had address limitations which meant that the maximum ammount of memory supported was around 3-3.5 gigs. This is in place even for the ppc smp sp2 node called silver, which I happen to run a couple of for ftp.se.debian.org. These were the high-end computational resources that were replaced by the POWER3, and couldn't handle more that 4 gigs of ram. The IBM sales manuals are around and pretty good at telling you exactly what hardware combinations are/were supported, I think you'll notice that the support for more than 4GB came at the launch of the POWER3 (or the RS64(?) chip, another ppc64 implementation used by ibm for the commercial computing segment rather than technical computing). Well, sparc64 has been around an awful long time. Adding PAE-like hacks seems Since 1995. There were largish SMP SPARC32 boxen for many years before the SPARC64 came into existence. I can't find any references on the web, but some of those big boxen had to have more than 4GB RAM. I wonder how much 4GB ram would have cost in 1995 or even 1998. I remember getting 16M for a 486 for $600 in 1992. I think it was 1996 when I got 128M for about the same amount. The price lists I found once for Decstation 5000 boxes had ram listed at around $5 for 128M in 1991. Even in 1995 4GB would have been a rather expensive amount of ram even for a high end sparc or power machine. Well, instead of searching for prices, go find an old manual of the largest sun sparc32 smp? The one I can think of right now is the ss1000, were there any bigger ones? Before the ultrasparc days that is. /Mattias Wadenstein
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 09:24:31PM +0200, Dirk H. Schulz wrote: Hi folks, I hope this is the right place for this kind of question: I want to run a server with more than 4 GB of RAM. I do not need applications/processes to address more than 4 GB each. Let's say I want to have 2 instances of apache on the machine, and each instance should address a max of 4 GB. Do I need a 64Bit Linux then? Or can I install a 32Bit Linux on a Server with 8 GB RAM, set up my 2 instances of apache, and that`s it? Sorry for that kind of basic question but I did not find any docs on that googling around. Ok, here are your options: 32bit kernel, 32bit user space: Each process gets 3GB of virtual address space. The kernel can divvy that up however it wants. You'll need to enable highmem support for that. If CPU performance isn't your bottleneck, it won't matter that you don't get to use the extra registers. You lose maybe 15% CPU performance, depending on what you're doing. (Compare SPEC scores breakdowns for AMD's submission, if you're curious.) This will be the most stable configuration, because you can just install i386 Sarge, and forget all about 64bit. (Yes, Opterons support PAE and all that's needed for a 32bit kernel to use lots of RAM.) The kernel has to use bounce buffers to move data around, because it can't map all the memory. The kernel uses the remaining 1GB of virtual address space for itself, and maps all the RAM it can. What's left is highmem. 64bit kernel, 32bit userspace: Each process gets 4GB of virtual address space. Disadvantage: you need a module-init-tools, iptables, and so on that can talk to the kernel. All the normal system calls by 32bit programs go through a translation layer (not much overhead, don't worry) so you can boot a 64bit kernel with root=/dev/path-to-i386-Sarge. You can install some 64bit libraries, or make some statically linked binaries, so you can run a few things 64bit. statically linked AMD64 iptables might be the best way to go. (you can debootstrap a 64bit chroot so you can apt-get install the stuff you need... Use dchroot to make your chroot convenient). The ia32-amd64 kernel translation layer works well, so while it might not be as stable as a fully i386 system, and you have to worry about special kernel interfaces that don't get 32bit translated, you don't have to worry about bugs in userspace programs like storing a pointer in an int variable. On an SMP system, the kernel will know about NUMA and be able to allocate memory that's attached to the CPU the requesting process is running on. 64bit kernel, 64bit userspace: Each process gets 64bit virtual address space. Same as above, but you have to worry about user-space too. Not all packages are available, and some of them have bugs because they truncate pointers to 32bits in some places. Just all around less stable still, not to mention that AMD64 Debian might not release with sarge, so security updates won't come from security.debian.org. You can install libraries so that you can run i386 binaries if you have any binary-only programs. (32bit code can't link to 64bit code at all, ever, on amd64. (not counting special translation layers like the kernel-userspace boundary).) 3D acceleration is only possible with 64/64 kernel/user, or 32/32, if that matters to you. 32bit kernel, 64bit userspace: not possible. -- #define X(x,y) x##y Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X([EMAIL PROTECTED] , des.ca) The gods confound the man who first found out how to distinguish the hours! Confound him, too, who in this place set up a sundial, to cut and hack my day so wretchedly into small pieces! -- Plautus, 200 BC
Re: Please requeue axiom
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 06:17:15PM -0400, Camm Maguire wrote: OK, thanks! Would be interested if each of your failed attempts was with gcl-2.6.5-1, and if you succeed now with gcl 2.6.5-2. If so, then there is a problem with binutils 2.15 on amd64. I did notice that it now was downloading the gcl 2.6.5-2 package. That version got installed the 4th of september. From the old log: gcl: already installed (in sufficient version 2.6.5-1 = 2.6.5-1) The 2.6.5-2 version got installed a few hours after the last time I tried to build it. Kurt
Re: Floppies for amd64 ?
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 01:32:37AM +0300, Kyuu Eturautti wrote: I know it's a bit off-subject, but I'd like to point out the very painful USB keyboard problem with Grub at least on AMD64 which was discussed a bit earlier. Imo, it's a far too large issue to be ignored in some cases. I wish they could fix it but even more, I'd appreciate (perhaps an upcoming) installer support for lilo on AMD64. I have switched off half a dozen personal P4 boxes to AMD64, but I don't plan to switch back to PS/2 KVM's. Lilo should work too. It's just that the default is grub. Kurt
Medley RAID
Hi all I hope this is the right place to ask this: I have a silicon image serial ata controller, which uses medley raid. I have to share the machine with windows so I can't simply ditch the medley and use md. What I'd like to know is: 1) Could you add medley/dmraid support into the latest debian amd64 build (at the moment it detects the hard disks individually and no raid) 2) or, how can I build a new image with medley/dmraid support? I tried replacing the kernel with a dmraid patched one but it seems I also need to compile dmraid, and I don't have any other amd64 systems with linux to do this with (I managed to compile the kernel with another 32bit system using the howto on debian.org) Thanks Ross
Re: Success report: installing pure64 on a dell poweredge 1850
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 02:32:43AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 23:16 -0700, Karl Hegbloom wrote: Apparently the 2.8GHz nocona is slower than the 1.8GHz Opteron. Intel got a lot of DEC engineers when it bought the Alpha from Compaq. Maybe they couldn't stand the thought of working for The Evil Empire, and joined the Rebellion? Does gcc support -m64 -march=pentium4? Maybe that would help. Code tuned for an Opteron might well be dog-slow on Nocona. I noticed that most of the benchmarks were faster on the nocona with -m32 instead of 64. The LU decomposition was almost a factor of 2, and that's not really a synthetic benchmark! -- #define X(x,y) x##y Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X([EMAIL PROTECTED] , des.ca) The gods confound the man who first found out how to distinguish the hours! Confound him, too, who in this place set up a sundial, to cut and hack my day so wretchedly into small pieces! -- Plautus, 200 BC
Re: mplayer e w32codecs
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 12:37:14PM +0200, Sythos wrote: On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 12:09:06PM +0200, Zoltan Varga wrote: You can run mplayer inside an ia32 chroot. It works for me. Zoltan Is video scaling accelerated, or is it like 3D where the client has to match the server? Run 64 and 32bit xvinfo and compare the outputs... too much simple in this way :) I want to view mplayer decode a DVD or Divx, write how can do this and share info. Only 64bit is better than 32bit chroot You can watch a DVD on i386 Debian without any non-free software, right? (not with mplayer, but with ogle or xine). -- #define X(x,y) x##y Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X([EMAIL PROTECTED] , des.ca) The gods confound the man who first found out how to distinguish the hours! Confound him, too, who in this place set up a sundial, to cut and hack my day so wretchedly into small pieces! -- Plautus, 200 BC
Re: Floppies for amd64 ?
Karl Hegbloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 01:32 +0300, Kyuu Eturautti wrote: I know it's a bit off-subject, but I'd like to point out the very painful USB keyboard problem with Grub at least on AMD64 which was discussed a bit earlier. Does anyone know the specifics of why grub has not been patched so that it will work with USB keyboards? The thing is that on my P-III box with USB keyboard (ASUS VP6), it works just fine. It is the same grub i386 uses. I would guess something is wrong with the hardware. MfG Goswin
Re: Floppies for amd64 ?
Karl Hegbloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 18:22 -0700, Karl Hegbloom wrote: On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 01:32 +0300, Kyuu Eturautti wrote: I know it's a bit off-subject, but I'd like to point out the very painful USB keyboard problem with Grub at least on AMD64 which was discussed a bit earlier. Does anyone know the specifics of why grub has not been patched so that it will work with USB keyboards? The thing is that on my P-III box with USB keyboard (ASUS VP6), it works just fine. I wonder if grub is really built with '-m32' if it's built with gcc-3.3? It is build on i386. Isn't that option only working right with gcc-3.4? If so, then perhaps what's the matter is that it's 64 bit and cannot call 32bit bios? -m32/64 only works properly with a multilib capable gcc. The normal gcc just ignores the right option and gives an error on the wrong one: cc1: sorry, unimplemented: 64-bit mode not compiled in MfG Goswin
Re: Do I need 64Bit if RAM is more than 4 GB?
On Wednesday 08 September 2004 23:13, Peter Cordes wrote: [Snip a good description of 32-vs 64-bit] 3D acceleration is only possible with 64/64 kernel/user, or 32/32, if that matters to you. The nvidia drivers provide 3D acceleration for both 64 and 32 bit apps on 64 bit kernels. Paul
Re: Don't see much difference between i386 vs amd64
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 12:37:22PM -0400, Mario Bertrand wrote: Hi, I have successfully install debian with sid-amd64-monolithic.iso on my second ide (+kernel 2.6.8-3) and I don't see much difference in the performance vs i386 sarge (+kernel 2.6.8-1) on my first ide. It is normal? Should I expect more? Someone told me that I should buy a new hard drive with more cache (8M) to take benefit of faster cpu. If you have plenty of RAM (1GB), the OS won't need to keep loading programs from disk all the time while they're running, because they won't get dropped from the cache. If whatever you're doing ends up waiting for the slow disk very often, getting a faster one will help you. hda - 2048k cache - 3923.96 BogoMIPS / i386 hdb - 69k cache - 3932.16/ amd64 Try a benchmark instead of an idle-loop calibrator: $ time bc -l ... scale=1000 4*a(1) quit look at user time, not real time, if you type in the commands by hand. IIRC, with some larger precision (scale=...), it's faster by 22s vs. 18s on an Opteron 240. (gcc-3.3 pure64 vs. i386 RedHat 9.) bonnie++ is a decent disk/filesystem benchmark -- #define X(x,y) x##y Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X([EMAIL PROTECTED] , des.ca) The gods confound the man who first found out how to distinguish the hours! Confound him, too, who in this place set up a sundial, to cut and hack my day so wretchedly into small pieces! -- Plautus, 200 BC
Don't see much difference between i386 vs amd64
Hi, I have successfully install debian with sid-amd64-monolithic.iso on my second ide (+kernel 2.6.8-3) and I don't see much difference in the performance vs i386 sarge (+kernel 2.6.8-1) on my first ide. It is normal? Should I expect more? Someone told me that I should buy a new hard drive with more cache (8M) to take benefit of faster cpu. hda - 2048k cache - 3923.96 BogoMIPS / i386 hdb - 69k cache - 3932.16 / amd64 -- Mario Bertrand
Re: Don't see much difference between i386 vs amd64
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 12:37:22PM -0400, Mario Bertrand wrote: I have successfully install debian with sid-amd64-monolithic.iso on my second ide (+kernel 2.6.8-3) and I don't see much difference in the performance vs i386 sarge (+kernel 2.6.8-1) on my first ide. It is normal? Should I expect more? Someone told me that I should buy a new hard drive with more cache (8M) to take benefit of faster cpu. hda - 2048k cache - 3923.96 BogoMIPS / i386 hdb - 69k cache - 3932.16/ amd64 As long as your disk access is not cpu bound, the speed of the HD determines the speed of the HD. If you wanter faster disk acces, buy a faster disk. The cache size on the disk can help, but it doesn't change the underlying rotation speed of the disk or the number of bits per rotation on the disk. It does help a bit under normal use for most people though, and 8M caches are easy to find (with 16M starting to appear). But yeah your speed is to be expected since that is apparently the speed of your current disk. Running a 64bit kernel on a 64bit cpu might speed up some applications. For other applications it probably won't make any difference. It probably would also matter if the application was compiled for 32 or 64bit. Len Sorensen
Re: Don't see much difference between i386 vs amd64
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 09:37, Mario Bertrand wrote: Hi, I have successfully install debian with sid-amd64-monolithic.iso on my second ide (+kernel 2.6.8-3) and I don't see much difference in the performance vs i386 sarge (+kernel 2.6.8-1) on my first ide. It is normal? Should I expect more? Someone told me that I should buy a new hard drive with more cache (8M) to take benefit of faster cpu. hda - 2048k cache - 3923.96 BogoMIPS / i386 hdb - 69k cache - 3932.16/ amd64 BogoMIPS just tells you about the clock speed of your CPU, roughly speaking. As the name says, it's Bogus and Misleading. In my experience the 64-bit mode of the Opteron gains about 20% over the 32-bit mode, and of course you can address more memory per process. -jwb
Re: Floppies for amd64 ?
On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 05:21:12PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 10:17:19PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote: The Switch make only GBit not 10/100 Hmm, OK, I thought they all did 10/100/1000. me too. Managed switches can have their port speed locked at Gb full duplex, though. I have installed lilo_22.5.9-3.0.0.1.amd64_and64.deb Well no idea about lilo. Yeah, I think a lot of people use GRUB. except for the big-RAM problem, (which is fixed now), grub has no trouble booting 64bit kernels. I have tried it with one memory Module (2 GByte) and it does not work. The Kernel does not find the second CPU I think the athlon 64 needs ram connected to every cpu. No. It would certainly work best that way. Yes. The bandwidth over the HT link is high enough, but you lose Opteron's latency advantage. Ram on the other CPU has similar latency to an Athlon going through a chipset. :) -- #define X(x,y) x##y Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X([EMAIL PROTECTED] , des.ca) The gods confound the man who first found out how to distinguish the hours! Confound him, too, who in this place set up a sundial, to cut and hack my day so wretchedly into small pieces! -- Plautus, 200 BC
