Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Mark Allums]

On 2/25/2010 11:05 PM, Peter Tenenbaum wrote:

Mark -- thanks for the warning about the limitations of the built-in
video.  I do intend to have Windows 7 on this computer as well, inside
of a vmware cage.

Based on the discussion, I will plan to press ahead with an Intel
motherboard and use onboard video as Plan A.  If that proves inadequate,
I will add an nVidia-based video card as Plan B.

-PT


That is fine, you can have alternate video to the built-in.

However, there is no point in adding a card to your setup as Plan B with 
Windows inside a VM, as the video is emulated.  VirtualBox can have 
accelerated video inside a VM by translating DX9 calls in Win into 
OpenGL calls on the Linux host, but even there, the device driver inside 
the VM does not even *pretend* to be an NVIDIA card.


If you want both Linux and Windows, you should have two separate 
computers.  My personal setup is a (rather fancy) Linux box, and a 
(rather fancy) Windows Box.  With 24" 16:10 monitors on each.


For serious work, the Linux machine gets lots of attention.  For 
relaxation, my Windows machine steps up.  (For mindless alien killing, 
my PS2, PS3, XBOX 360, etc, does nicely.)


Mark Allums


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b876da8.7080...@allums.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Peter Tenenbaum]

Mark -- thanks for the warning about the limitations of the built-in video.
I do intend to have Windows 7 on this computer as well, inside of a vmware
cage.

Based on the discussion, I will plan to press ahead with an Intel
motherboard and use onboard video as Plan A.  If that proves inadequate, I
will add an nVidia-based video card as Plan B.

-PT

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Stan Hoeppner]

Mark Allums put forth on 2/25/2010 1:23 AM:
> On 2/25/2010 12:49 AM, Matthew Moore wrote:
>> On Wednesday February 24 2010 11:14:19 pm Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>>> Mark Allums put forth on 2/25/2010 12:04 AM:
 On 2/23/2010 11:20 PM, Peter Tenenbaum wrote:
> OK, you've convinced me to go with the Intel motherboard.  Thanks for
> all the tips!
>
> -PT

 Don't go with the Intel MB unless it will only ever be used for Linux.
 If it might be used for Windows, reconsider.
>>>
>>> Wow, that's... an interesting comment.  Upon what do you base this
>>> recommendation Mark?  During 16 years of experience I've never heard
>>> of a
>>> boxed Intel desktop board having any problems with Windows or vice
>>> versa.
>>
>> Indeed. I have been using Intel motherboards for over a decade and I have
>> found them to be more compatible, reliable, and stable than any other
>> brand.
>>
>> MM
>>
>>
> 
> It's the sucky Intel video.  On Linux, it's good enough.  On Windows, OP
> will want something a little... better.

Ahh, ok.  I admit I've not used the inbuilt video on recent Intel boards in
Windows for anything except normal 2D desktop apps, browsing, etc.  I've not
monkeyed with the Windows Aero or whatever they call it of Vista.  They seem
fine with 2D only stuff.  For any serious 3D apps (gaming) I always go with
an external GPU, usually nVidia.

-- 
Stan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b8638d1.4080...@hardwarefreak.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Mark Allums]

On 2/25/2010 12:49 AM, Matthew Moore wrote:

On Wednesday February 24 2010 11:14:19 pm Stan Hoeppner wrote:

Mark Allums put forth on 2/25/2010 12:04 AM:

On 2/23/2010 11:20 PM, Peter Tenenbaum wrote:

OK, you've convinced me to go with the Intel motherboard.  Thanks for
all the tips!

-PT


Don't go with the Intel MB unless it will only ever be used for Linux.
If it might be used for Windows, reconsider.


Wow, that's... an interesting comment.  Upon what do you base this
recommendation Mark?  During 16 years of experience I've never heard of a
boxed Intel desktop board having any problems with Windows or vice versa.


Indeed. I have been using Intel motherboards for over a decade and I have
found them to be more compatible, reliable, and stable than any other brand.

MM




It's the sucky Intel video.  On Linux, it's good enough.  On Windows, OP 
will want something a little... better.


Mark Allums



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b86258f.5030...@allums.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Matthew Moore]

On Wednesday February 24 2010 11:14:19 pm Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Mark Allums put forth on 2/25/2010 12:04 AM:
> > On 2/23/2010 11:20 PM, Peter Tenenbaum wrote:
> >> OK, you've convinced me to go with the Intel motherboard.  Thanks for
> >> all the tips!
> >>
> >> -PT
> >
> > Don't go with the Intel MB unless it will only ever be used for Linux.
> > If it might be used for Windows, reconsider.
> 
> Wow, that's... an interesting comment.  Upon what do you base this
> recommendation Mark?  During 16 years of experience I've never heard of a
> boxed Intel desktop board having any problems with Windows or vice versa.

Indeed. I have been using Intel motherboards for over a decade and I have 
found them to be more compatible, reliable, and stable than any other brand.

MM


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201002242349.10406.anonymous.jon...@gmail.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Stan Hoeppner]

Mark Allums put forth on 2/25/2010 12:04 AM:
> On 2/23/2010 11:20 PM, Peter Tenenbaum wrote:
>> OK, you've convinced me to go with the Intel motherboard.  Thanks for
>> all the tips!
>>
>> -PT
> 
> Don't go with the Intel MB unless it will only ever be used for Linux.
> If it might be used for Windows, reconsider.

Wow, that's... an interesting comment.  Upon what do you base this
recommendation Mark?  During 16 years of experience I've never heard of a
boxed Intel desktop board having any problems with Windows or vice versa.

-- 
Stan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b86153b.2070...@hardwarefreak.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Mark Allums]

On 2/23/2010 11:20 PM, Peter Tenenbaum wrote:

OK, you've convinced me to go with the Intel motherboard.  Thanks for
all the tips!

-PT


Don't go with the Intel MB unless it will only ever be used for Linux. 
If it might be used for Windows, reconsider.


Mark Allums



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b8612d2.6000...@allums.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Peter Tenenbaum]

OK, you've convinced me to go with the Intel motherboard.  Thanks for all
the tips!

-PT

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Mark Allums]

On 2/23/2010 12:43 AM, Jacek Politowski wrote:

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:32:55PM -0600, Mark Allums wrote:


It's true, you can have large memory with i386, but why?


To have still the most compatible system?

Some legacy apps may still be available only as 32-bit.

Theoretically most of the 32-bit software should run fine on 64-bit
kernel with 32-bit userland, but it's not true for all of it -
take Virtualbox as an example. Virtualbox is the reason why I haven't
switched to amd64 kernel, I'm waiting for multiarch support in Debian
(which of course will not help for apps available only as 32-bit and
not compatible with 64-bit kernel, but I don't think I use any of
them).

Yes, I know I could switch to a fully amd64 desktop, yet it's a
not-as-easy-as-it-looks and time-consuming process.




For existing systems, I recommend sticking with what you already have, 
but for new systems, I recommend 64-bit.  Most newbies are not saddled 
with legacy apps.


Mark Allums


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b846ac1.5080...@allums.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

On Tuesday 23 February 2010 09:40:10 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> It's a crappy system.  Layers of additional complexity
> and breakage just to deal with the politics of "free".  This is one of the
> many reasons I roll my own kernels from kernel.org source.  I love Debian,
> but I don't care for the Debian kernels.  But I'm getting OT now, and this
> thread needs to die.

Debian was founded with the DFSG as one of its guiding documents.  I share the 
values expressed in the document, and am opposed to Debian shirking any of the 
requirements therein.

It would be nice if the Linux kernel team provided source tarballs consistent 
with those same principles.  When they do not, I am glad the Debian kernel 
team takes on the task of preparing packages that are consistent with those 
principles.

Free Software has never been without cost.  Sometimes that cost is time and 
complexity.  Sometimes that cost is incompatibility with proprietary systems.  
Sometimes that cost is lack of features.  The Free Software community shares 
these costs and eliminates them where it is legally and technically possible.

In any case, I also agree that the thread needs to end.  I will try to make 
this my last post in it.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Stan Hoeppner]

Johan Kullstam put forth on 2/23/2010 7:26 AM:

> After having trouble with the Realtek motherboard built-in ethernet, I
> just sprung for a PCI Intel ethernet.  They are only like $30.

Goto Newegg and look at all the cards.  You can get a PCI GigE Realtek card
for $7.  Seven f--king USD.  That's 1/4 the price of the cheapest Intel PCI
GigE card.  Look at ICs in volume, and the pricing on the RTL 816x chips is
less than $1, the Intel chips a few dollars.

Considering how important network connectivity is today, why would someone
spend $7 for an el crapo ethernet device when they can spend $30 and know
they'll probably never have a problem with it?

> I hate Realtek ethernet, but it is very hard to find a motherboard with
> anything else on it.  Thanks for the information.

They're integrated on so darn many motherboards because they're so $deity
damn cheap.  This is exactly the reason you see so few mobos with Intel
ethernet on board-- it's not cheap.  Most boards with Intel ethernet onboard
are server and workstation boards, and some high end enthusiast desktop mobos.

The old adage is still true:  "You get what you pay for."

-- 
Stan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b83f923.7080...@hardwarefreak.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Stan Hoeppner]

Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 2/23/2010 7:22 AM:

> While it could happen in the future, there's no system in place (AFAIK) for 
> the system to recommend certain packages based on the user's hardware 
> profile.  
> It is very easy to be missing the firmware because you a missing a package.

Yeah, no kidding.  It's a crappy system.  Layers of additional complexity
and breakage just to deal with the politics of "free".  This is one of the
many reasons I roll my own kernels from kernel.org source.  I love Debian,
but I don't care for the Debian kernels.  But I'm getting OT now, and this
thread needs to die.

-- 
Stan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b83f6da.60...@hardwarefreak.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Johan Kullstam]

Stan Hoeppner  writes:

> Peter Tenenbaum put forth on 2/21/2010 10:01 PM:
>> Stan --
>> 
>> It sounds like, if the Realtek drivers are not present on the Debian
>> distribution, I have at least two options:  going to the Realtek site and
>> downloading their linux 64 bit drivers, or compiling my own kernel from
>> source on kernel.org.  Does that sound about right?
>> 
>> As far as video cards are concerned, I have a (probably) ignorant question:
>> how do I put the integrated northbridge video support to use on these
>> motherboards, since they do not appear to have any video output spigots on
>> them?
>
> Given the length of one of my recent posts, you may have missed this at the
> bottom.   To save yourself a lot of potential headache getting Debian
> installed and running, and keeping it running, you should really get this
> Intel motherboard, and not the Gibabyte or any others, specifically due to
> the onboard Intel Pro 1000 GigE chip.  It'll give superior performance
> compared to either the Realtek or Marvell, and you'll never have a
> compatibility issue with it WRT Linux/Debian drivers.  The Realtek
> 8111/8168/8169 has had such recent problems.
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121394
>
> I've never heard of a Linux problem relating to an Intel ethernet chip.
> They're just rock solid.  I use nothing else in my Debian servers due to
> problems with DEC 211x0 chips and some 3COM chips in the past.  3COM used to
> be the gold standard, but as I said, I had Linux problems with some 3C59x
> and 3C90x cards and switched to Intel.  I've never looked back.

Lightning zapped my 3c905b.  The cumputer had a surge protector, but the
cable side of the cable modem didn't.  It wiped out my whole wired
network.  DEC tulips were great but the drivers have suffered bit rot
since their heyday in the 90s.

After having trouble with the Realtek motherboard built-in ethernet, I
just sprung for a PCI Intel ethernet.  They are only like $30.

I hate Realtek ethernet, but it is very hard to find a motherboard with
anything else on it.  Thanks for the information.

-- 
Johan KULLSTAM


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/873a0snkv7@emmy.axel.nom

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

In <4b83a91b.8040...@hardwarefreak.com>, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 2/22/2010 1:01 PM:
>> So, non-free firmware is normally moved to non-free instead of being
>> dropped from Debian entirely for many years now.  Drivers that were
>> previously dropped because of non-free firmware might be added back in, if
>> they can be modified to use request_firmware().  Filing a bug might be
>> appropriate here.
>
>So how do you make this jibe with the case of the RTL 8168/9 in Squeeze
>2.6.32, where the driver exists and loads, yet can't find the firmware blob,
>then fails?

Have you installed the appropriate -firmware package from non-free?  Since it 
is not DFSG-free, that's where it would be.  It wouldn't be in the linux-
kernel-image package in main.

>>From what you're saying, it should have still been distributed somewhere
>into the filesystem and findable by the kernel, so as to not brick the
>users' ethernet, no?

If they installed the correct package.  Yes.  It is not distributed as part of 
the linux-kernel-image package in main.  It should have been broken out into 
its own package (or into a package with similar firmware) and put into non-
free.

I can't find the firmware package for that piece of hardware.  A bug report 
may be appropriate.  I could not find one that discussed a DFSG violation 
w.r.t. the firmware for these devices.  A patch to the kernel dsc to generate 
the new -firmware package, and (if needed) convert the module to using 
request_firmware() would certainly be appreciated.

After installing the linux-patch-debian-2.6.32 package, these files might 
clarify the situation:
/usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.32/debian/debian/dfsg/r8169-rtl8168d-1-2-
disable.patch.bz2
/usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.32/debian/features/all/r8169-init-phy-return-
error.patch.bz2
/usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.32/debian/features/all/r8169-rtl8168d-1-2-
request_firmware-2.patch.bz2
/usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.32/debian/features/all/r8169-rtl8168d-1-2-
request_firmware.patch.bz2

>Well, it didn't happen.  The firmware blob was completely ripped out by the
>Debian kernel team and or other devs and now bricks RTL 8168/9 interfaces.

While it could happen in the future, there's no system in place (AFAIK) for 
the system to recommend certain packages based on the user's hardware profile.  
It is very easy to be missing the firmware because you a missing a package.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Stan Hoeppner]

Peter Tenenbaum put forth on 2/21/2010 10:01 PM:
> Stan --
> 
> It sounds like, if the Realtek drivers are not present on the Debian
> distribution, I have at least two options:  going to the Realtek site and
> downloading their linux 64 bit drivers, or compiling my own kernel from
> source on kernel.org.  Does that sound about right?
> 
> As far as video cards are concerned, I have a (probably) ignorant question:
> how do I put the integrated northbridge video support to use on these
> motherboards, since they do not appear to have any video output spigots on
> them?

Given the length of one of my recent posts, you may have missed this at the
bottom.   To save yourself a lot of potential headache getting Debian
installed and running, and keeping it running, you should really get this
Intel motherboard, and not the Gibabyte or any others, specifically due to
the onboard Intel Pro 1000 GigE chip.  It'll give superior performance
compared to either the Realtek or Marvell, and you'll never have a
compatibility issue with it WRT Linux/Debian drivers.  The Realtek
8111/8168/8169 has had such recent problems.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121394

I've never heard of a Linux problem relating to an Intel ethernet chip.
They're just rock solid.  I use nothing else in my Debian servers due to
problems with DEC 211x0 chips and some 3COM chips in the past.  3COM used to
be the gold standard, but as I said, I had Linux problems with some 3C59x
and 3C90x cards and switched to Intel.  I've never looked back.

-- 
Stan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b83bdd0.7060...@hardwarefreak.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Stan Hoeppner]

Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 2/22/2010 1:01 PM:

> So, non-free firmware is normally moved to non-free instead of being dropped 
> from Debian entirely for many years now.  Drivers that were previously 
> dropped 
> because of non-free firmware might be added back in, if they can be modified 
> to use request_firmware().  Filing a bug might be appropriate here.

So how do you make this jibe with the case of the RTL 8168/9 in Squeeze
2.6.32, where the driver exists and loads, yet can't find the firmware blob,
then fails?

I'm talking the Squeeze 2.6.32 kernel.  There was a lengthy thread a month
ago.  An OP's RTL 8169 wouldn't function because the new kernel couldn't
load the firmware blob.  My investigation shows the Debian kernel team (not
upstream) removed the firmware blob as they deemed it "non-free".  Dig up
the old post for details.

>From what you're saying, it should have still been distributed somewhere
into the filesystem and findable by the kernel, so as to not brick the
users' ethernet, no?

Well, it didn't happen.  The firmware blob was completely ripped out by the
Debian kernel team and or other devs and now bricks RTL 8168/9 interfaces.

I am asking you about this specific case, not about whether the Debian
kernel team are normally "good and flawless".

-- 
Stan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b83a91b.8040...@hardwarefreak.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Jacek Politowski]

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:32:55PM -0600, Mark Allums wrote:

>It's true, you can have large memory with i386, but why?

To have still the most compatible system?

Some legacy apps may still be available only as 32-bit.

Theoretically most of the 32-bit software should run fine on 64-bit
kernel with 32-bit userland, but it's not true for all of it -
take Virtualbox as an example. Virtualbox is the reason why I haven't
switched to amd64 kernel, I'm waiting for multiarch support in Debian
(which of course will not help for apps available only as 32-bit and
not compatible with 64-bit kernel, but I don't think I use any of
them).

Yes, I know I could switch to a fully amd64 desktop, yet it's a
not-as-easy-as-it-looks and time-consuming process.


-- 
Jacek Politowski


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100223064337.ga3...@trek.localdomain

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Mark Allums]

On 2/22/2010 7:44 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:

In<4b832dbb.5050...@allums.com>, Mark Allums wrote:

On 2/22/2010 6:19 PM, Johan Kullstam wrote:

Mark Allums   writes:

AMD64 is the designation for the 64-bit chip architecture, not the
actual chip manufacturer.  AMD devised it, and Intel did the sensible
thing and copied it when they expanded their x86 architecture to
64-bit; it was a very good design.


The 32 bit i386 is also viable.


That's true (but it's losing ground fast).  Most people install 4 MB or
more these days, and want it all.


They can still use it all, just not all in a single process by using the i386
userland with the (Debian-provided) amd64 kernel.

Unless you are doing A/V work (Rendering, large image editing, large sound
file editing, or video editing), a single process taking 2+ GiB of memory is
probably indicative of a problem.



Anyway, 32-bit will soon be relegated to smartphones and iPads. 
Desktops and serious laptops will need 64-bit in both kernel and 
userland.  Netbooks?  I don't know, but I don't really care, especially.


It's true, you can have large memory with i386, but why?

Mark Allums




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b835a77.7040...@allums.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

In <4b832dbb.5050...@allums.com>, Mark Allums wrote:
>On 2/22/2010 6:19 PM, Johan Kullstam wrote:
>> Mark Allums  writes:
>>> AMD64 is the designation for the 64-bit chip architecture, not the
>>> actual chip manufacturer.  AMD devised it, and Intel did the sensible
>>> thing and copied it when they expanded their x86 architecture to
>>> 64-bit; it was a very good design.
>>
>> The 32 bit i386 is also viable.
>
>That's true (but it's losing ground fast).  Most people install 4 MB or
>more these days, and want it all.

They can still use it all, just not all in a single process by using the i386 
userland with the (Debian-provided) amd64 kernel.

Unless you are doing A/V work (Rendering, large image editing, large sound 
file editing, or video editing), a single process taking 2+ GiB of memory is 
probably indicative of a problem.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Mark Allums]

On 2/22/2010 6:19 PM, Johan Kullstam wrote:

Mark Allums  writes:


If the MB uses the Intel ICH10 Southbridge, the SATA, at least, will
work.  If the Northbridge is Intel, as it virtually *must* be with the
Core i5, the GPU will be okay.  If the GPU is external, then buying an
AMD/ATI or NVIDIA card will be safe.  Most boards have Marvell NIC
chips, that's covered.


Really?  All I seem to be able to find is Realtek.  It is easy to get an
actual card.


ASUS uses Marvell for Gigabit, and Giga-Byte also on some boards.  Other 
GB boards apparently have other things.  Marvell was a popular choice a 
few years ago.  It may be that now, they aren't the only game in town. 
I may be out of touch.






And sound will almost certainly be Intel
Azalia HD; that's covered.  I think you'll be fine.


I made that assumption based on the fact that it's an Intel-based board, 
but Realtek is still very common for Audio.  But Realtek is okay.  There 
are drivers for it.




AMD64 is the designation for the 64-bit chip architecture, not the
actual chip manufacturer.  AMD devised it, and Intel did the sensible
thing and copied it when they expanded their x86 architecture to
64-bit; it was a very good design.


The 32 bit i386 is also viable.


That's true (but it's losing ground fast).  Most people install 4 MB or 
more these days, and want it all.



There are a few things which are not

yet available for amd64.  These are all non-free, but some people want
acrobat reader.  And hulu won't work with the 64 bit flash.


Flash is obsolete, and good riddance.  HTML 5, FTW!  Use 
Iceweasel/Firefox, or Google Chrome, and you will find that some YouTube 
videos work anyway, and you have flash blocked, or not even installed.




Stay away from the IA64 port.  That's for the Itanium.


I did that.  It took me like an hour to figure out why my machine
wouldn't boot off the disk.  D'OH!


LOL!  An hour gone from your life you'll never get back.

Mark Allums


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b832dbb.5050...@allums.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Johan Kullstam]

Mark Allums  writes:

> On 2/20/2010 5:18 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> Peter Tenenbaum put forth on 2/20/2010 4:51 PM:
>>> Hello there --
>>>
>>> I am planning to assemble a new computer for my home, and to run debian
>>> linux on it.  I'm planning to use an Intel Core i5-660 CPU in this
>>> computer.  From the documentation, it looks like the correct binary to use
>>> is the AMD64.  Is this right?  Does anyone know of any problems running
>>> debian AMD64 on Intel core-i5 processors?
>>
>> This is the proper binary for the core i5, but that's the least of your 
>> worries.
>>   Your real concern should focus on whether Debian/Linux has all the drivers 
>> for
>> the various hardware devices on the motherboard and in the expansion slots,
>> including, but not limited to:
>>
>> 1.  GPU
>> 2.  Network interface
>> 3.  SATA controller
>> 4.  Sound chip
>>
>
> If the MB uses the Intel ICH10 Southbridge, the SATA, at least, will
> work.  If the Northbridge is Intel, as it virtually *must* be with the
> Core i5, the GPU will be okay.  If the GPU is external, then buying an
> AMD/ATI or NVIDIA card will be safe.  Most boards have Marvell NIC
> chips, that's covered.

Really?  All I seem to be able to find is Realtek.  It is easy to get an
actual card.

> And sound will almost certainly be Intel
> Azalia HD; that's covered.  I think you'll be fine.
>
> AMD64 is the designation for the 64-bit chip architecture, not the
> actual chip manufacturer.  AMD devised it, and Intel did the sensible
> thing and copied it when they expanded their x86 architecture to
> 64-bit; it was a very good design.

The 32 bit i386 is also viable.  There are a few things which are not
yet available for amd64.  These are all non-free, but some people want
acrobat reader.  And hulu won't work with the 64 bit flash.

> Stay away from the IA64 port.  That's for the Itanium.

I did that.  It took me like an hour to figure out why my machine
wouldn't boot off the disk.  D'OH!

> Mark Allums

-- 
Johan KULLSTAM


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ocjgst1h@emmy.axel.nom

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

On Monday 22 February 2010 12:25:38 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 2/22/2010 10:05 AM:
> >> [...] any software that doesn't meet the "Free"
> >> criteria isn't included by default.  For kernel drivers, this creates a
> >> huge problem.  There is no way to include "non-free" in your Debian
> >> kernel like you do in
> >> /apt/sources.list.  The Debian kernel team makes that choice for your.
> >
> > That's not true.
> 
> According to this, it is true.  Note [3] below:
> 
> [01:07:16][r...@greer]/usr/src/linux-2.6.31.1/Documentation/firmware_class$
> cat README
> 
>  request_firmware() hotplug interface:
>  
> Copyright (C) 2003 Manuel Estrada Sainz
[...]
>   3) Some people, like the Debian crowd, don't consider some firmware free
>  enough and remove entire drivers (e.g.: keyspan).

This doesn't happen regularly, especially since the request_firmware() 
interface was mainlined.

In the bad old days before request_firmware(), non-free firmware basically 
required removing whole drivers because the driver was non-functional without 
the data in the header file, the header file was non-free, and the Debian 
kernel needed to be in main.  There were some other ways around this, but 
normally dropping the module was the most expedient solution.

Now that we have request_firmware(), even if the original driver uses static 
data in a header, the Debian kernel developers take that data and dump it to a 
file and put that in non-free.  At the same time, the modify the driver to use 
request_firmware() instead of expecting the static data in the header.  This 
is relatively easy to do, so it is the normal way of handling modules that 
include non-free firmware.  It is rare, but possible, that it is difficult to 
modify a module to use request_firmware() instead of static data; dropping the 
module might still be more expedient in that case.

So, non-free firmware is normally moved to non-free instead of being dropped 
from Debian entirely for many years now.  Drivers that were previously dropped 
because of non-free firmware might be added back in, if they can be modified 
to use request_firmware().  Filing a bug might be appropriate here.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Stan Hoeppner]

Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 2/22/2010 10:05 AM:

>> [...] any software that doesn't meet the "Free"
>> criteria isn't included by default.  For kernel drivers, this creates a
>> huge problem.  There is no way to include "non-free" in your Debian kernel
>> like you do in
>> /apt/sources.list.  The Debian kernel team makes that choice for your.
> 
> That's not true.  Whenever a firmware is removed from the upstream kernel 
> source, as long as it meets the requirements for non-free, it is put into a 
> firmware package in non-free.  In addition, there's a linux-firmware meta-
> package in non-free that installs all the firmware that comes with the 
> upstream kernel.

According to this, it is true.  Note [3] below:

[01:07:16][r...@greer]/usr/src/linux-2.6.31.1/Documentation/firmware_class$
cat README

 request_firmware() hotplug interface:
 
Copyright (C) 2003 Manuel Estrada Sainz

 Why:
 ---

 Today, the most extended way to use firmware in the Linux kernel is linking
 it statically in a header file. Which has political and technical issues:

  1) Some firmware is not legal to redistribute.
  2) The firmware occupies memory permanently, even though it often is just
 used once.
  3) Some people, like the Debian crowd, don't consider some firmware free
 enough and remove entire drivers (e.g.: keyspan).

Apparently there are multiple degrees or definitions of "Free", and Debian
doesn't use the same one as other folks.  I'm not slinging mud here.  I'm
not calling out Debian devs.  I'm not saying they're doing anything wrong.
I'm merely stating the fact that they do things a bit differently when it
comes to the definition of "Free".  And, this wreaks havoc on Debian users
on occasion, as they're usually totally unaware of the issue until they see
a device break that was working fine before an upgrade.

-- 
Stan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b82cc22.4030...@hardwarefreak.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

In <4b821e8a.4040...@hardwarefreak.com>, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>Peter Tenenbaum put forth on 2/21/2010 10:01 PM:
>> Stan --
>>
>> It sounds like, if the Realtek drivers are not present on the Debian
>> distribution.
>
> [...] any software that doesn't meet the "Free"
> criteria isn't included by default.  For kernel drivers, this creates a
> huge problem.  There is no way to include "non-free" in your Debian kernel
> like you do in
>/apt/sources.list.  The Debian kernel team makes that choice for your.

That's not true.  Whenever a firmware is removed from the upstream kernel 
source, as long as it meets the requirements for non-free, it is put into a 
firmware package in non-free.  In addition, there's a linux-firmware meta-
package in non-free that installs all the firmware that comes with the 
upstream kernel.

>The really odd thing is that this firmware blob is included (was?) with the
>standard Lenny kernel, 2.6.26.  During development of the Squeeze and SID
>kernels, the Debian kernel team decided this firmware blob was no longer
>considered "free", so they removed it.

The Debian kernel team generally depends on bug reports to let them know that 
some new part of the upstream kernel is not free.  They remove it once the bug 
report is filed.

Since DDs are human, it is entirely possible for non-free parts of packages to 
slip through the cracks and get included in a release.  The kernel is not the 
first package to have this happen.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Stan Hoeppner]

Peter Tenenbaum put forth on 2/21/2010 10:01 PM:
> Stan --
> 
> It sounds like, if the Realtek drivers are not present on the Debian
> distribution, I have at least two options:  going to the Realtek site and
> downloading their linux 64 bit drivers, or compiling my own kernel from
> source on kernel.org.  Does that sound about right?

Hay Peter.  It's not quite that simple, I'm sorry to say.  The drivers are there
in the Debian kernels, and load properly.  The problem is that nearly every
intelligent ASIC in a system has firmware that executes on the chip--its own
local OS if you will.  With many networking chips, instead of including this
firmware on the card or mobo burned into an eeprom or flash memory chip, some
vendors ship the firmware binary with the driver.  It is then up to the host
operating system to upload the firmware binary to the peripheral chip upon each
boot cycle, when it executes the driver code.  There are a couple of advantages
to this:

1.  Eliminates the cost and complexity of an additional chip (eeprom/flash)
2.  Distribution of firmware updates is almost seamless, users oblivious

The problem with the Realtek 8168/9 is that apparently the Realtek folks have
made no firm declarations about the trademark/copyright/patent status of the
firmware code, or if they have, the statements are confusing to the Debian
kernel team.  The Debian project is (forcefully) guided by Richard Stallman's
FSF ideals, and thus, any software that doesn't meet the "Free" criteria isn't
included by default.  For kernel drivers, this creates a huge problem.  There is
no way to include "non-free" in your Debian kernel like you do in
/apt/sources.list.  The Debian kernel team makes that choice for your.

The really odd thing is that this firmware blob is included (was?) with the
standard Lenny kernel, 2.6.26.  During development of the Squeeze and SID
kernels, the Debian kernel team decided this firmware blob was no longer
considered "free", so they removed it.

> As far as video cards are concerned, I have a (probably) ignorant question:
> how do I put the integrated northbridge video support to use on these
> motherboards, since they do not appear to have any video output spigots on
> them?

Don't get one of those boards.  If you're dead set on getting an i5 CPU, the
board linked below is the best bang for the buck by leaps and bounds.  And it's
a true blue Intel board.  It has an Intel GigE chip, so you'll avoid any of the
Realtek 8168/9 firmware issues discussed above.  It has DB-15 VGA, DVI, and HDMI
video connectors on the back panel, so you can connect to pretty much any
computer monitor or HD TV display manufactured in the past 20 years.  It uses
the H55 north bridge, so as Mark said, you may/might have to wait a while for
full xorg and 3d support.  $99 USD

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121394

If you haven't picked out a case yet, I recommend this Apevia:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811144140

I just built a dual core AMD system for my Dad a few months ago with this case.
 It's geared toward LAN gamers, but I find it a perfect average user desktop
case, that's just a little bit different enough to be cool yet not tacky.  It's
so quiet you must strain to hear it.  It has excellent front-back airflow.  The
PSU has more connectors than you need, _but_ it includes two SATA drive power
connectors so you don't need to buy adapters.  All PSU wires are sheathed in
black braided plastic tubes, which is a really nice touch.  It's all aluminum
except for the plastic front face, and the cover which is really lightweight
stamped steel, and can bend somewhat easily if you're not careful with it.  The
cover attaches via 3 thumb screws, no screwdriver required.  Just a great little
case in my opinion.

-- 
Stan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b821e8a.4040...@hardwarefreak.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Mark Allums]

On 2/21/2010 11:35 PM, Kelly Harding wrote:

My understanding was that USB3.0 was supported by Linux before any
other OS, and it is meant to be backwards compatible with USB1.1 and
USB2.0 anyhow, so I don't think you'll hit problems there.

Besides USB3.0 is still fairly new, so it will take time for there to
be devices on the market etc, by which time drivers for the
controllers will be pretty stable I'd imagine. Of course take this
with a pinch of salt perhaps ;)



I think you are correct, with at least one implementation.  I seem to 
remember reading that.  There are at least two chips.  I don't remember 
if both implementations are covered.




SATA3 shouldn't really be a major issue as the chipsets are meant to
be compatiblew th SATA1 and SATA2, but it is a case with a lot of
these things of YMMV.


I don't trust new chips with critical data.  It's always something.

It's true that old 3.0Gb/s drive should work, electrically.  Is the 
firmware solid?  6.0Gb/s drives should work on old chips, electrically. 
 How flaky is the firmware here?  Combine new chip with new drive.  Are 
we on solid ground now?  I shall maintain good backups, at least.


You're correct in both particulars.  Thanks for the corrections.

Mark Allums





--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b821b11.7030...@allums.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Kelly Harding]

My understanding was that USB3.0 was supported by Linux before any
other OS, and it is meant to be backwards compatible with USB1.1 and
USB2.0 anyhow, so I don't think you'll hit problems there.

Besides USB3.0 is still fairly new, so it will take time for there to
be devices on the market etc, by which time drivers for the
controllers will be pretty stable I'd imagine. Of course take this
with a pinch of salt perhaps ;)

SATA3 shouldn't really be a major issue as the chipsets are meant to
be compatiblew th SATA1 and SATA2, but it is a case with a lot of
these things of YMMV.

kelly


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/e4f72f791002212135x70ca9b1bs18198d88eaa8d...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Mark Allums]

On 2/21/2010 10:01 PM, Peter Tenenbaum wrote:

Stan --

It sounds like, if the Realtek drivers are not present on the Debian
distribution, I have at least two options:  going to the Realtek site
and downloading their linux 64 bit drivers, or compiling my own kernel
from source on kernel.org .  Does that sound about
right?

As far as video cards are concerned, I have a (probably) ignorant
question: how do I put the integrated northbridge video support to use
on these motherboards, since they do not appear to have any video output
spigots on them?

Thanks for all your help with my project!
-PT



If your set of connectors doesn't include video, your chosen motherboard 
does not have integrated video.


Using generic drivers from an OEM is a lot of work.  You must be 
prepared to compile and install a kernel module, making sure to use the 
correct version of gcc, or worse, patch a generic kernel, configure it, 
and compile it, then install it.  This can be fun, but it can also be 
tedious.


Rolling your own gives you complete control of the process.  It also 
requires a lot of responsibility.


You must watch the security advisories, and be prepared to patch and 
recompile on short notice every time a kernel hack is found.



I like ASUS "enthusiast" boards.  These are expensive.  If you are 
looking for a midrange machine, you may not like my choices.  Newegg is 
a place to look to get a feel for the current state of the industry. 
They have good prices on popular boards.  Go to newegg.com and look 
around, then visit tech blogs and review sites to learn about those 
boards that looked interesting.  anandtech, hardocp, ars technica, etc.


I am using an older X58 board, the ASUS P6T Deluxe V2.  Since it is 
socket 1366, it was pricey, especially since it required 50% more memory.


You might look at boards in the ASUS P7P55 series, say the P7P55D-E 
Deluxe.  However, it also has the 6.0G SATA support, which is probably 
another driver headache.  Goto usa.asus.com, and look at socket 1156 boards.


Good luck!

Mark Allums






--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b820f4c.9090...@allums.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Peter Tenenbaum]

Stan --

It sounds like, if the Realtek drivers are not present on the Debian
distribution, I have at least two options:  going to the Realtek site and
downloading their linux 64 bit drivers, or compiling my own kernel from
source on kernel.org.  Does that sound about right?

As far as video cards are concerned, I have a (probably) ignorant question:
how do I put the integrated northbridge video support to use on these
motherboards, since they do not appear to have any video output spigots on
them?

Thanks for all your help with my project!
-PT

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Peter Tenenbaum]

Mark --

I'm not expecting to be too into 3-D effects, so I'll plan on using the
Debian drivers for the video.

Thanks for the tip about ASUS, I'll look at their motherboards for my
preferred CPU.  The Gigabyte does indeed have a large number of USB 2 ports
(8 on the back panel, with support for up to 4 more from the front panel).
Right now I don't even own any USB 3 peripherals; I'm interested / willing
to get a motherboard with USB 3 support basically as a hedge against future
developments, since I'd like this computer to stay usable for some years,
and can't predict what the future of port standards will be.

Thanks again for all your help,
-PT

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Stan Hoeppner]

Mark Allums put forth on 2/21/2010 5:52 PM:

> Realtek audio is covered.  I can't speak to Realtek LAN.  P55 is the
> very latest Intel Northbridge.  I don't know if X servers or drivers yet
> exist for the version of it that supports the Intel GPU, but I'm sure
> that they will exist shortly if they don't already.  Since you plan to
> use NVIDIA, the point is moot.

The Realtek LAN chips are all covered, but there may be issues with some
firmware blobs when using packaged Debian kernels.  There was a thread on here
recently about this.  Someone moved from packaged Squeeze kernel 2.6.30 to
2.6.32 IIRC, and between those revs there was confusion amongst the Debian
kernel team about the "free-ness" of the Realtek 8168/9 firmware blob.  Due to
this, they decided to leave out that firmware blob, breaking the driver and thus
making the interface useless without some less than trivial surgery by the OP.

Chances are your Gigabyte mobo uses the 8169, and you may likely run into this
issue with packaged Debian kernels.  If you compile your own kernel from
kernel.org source and include all firmware blobs in your kernel, you'll never
have this issue.  This debacle is just one of the many reasons I spin my kernels
with kernel.org source, building all needed drivers and all firmware blobs into
the kernel image.  I do not use initrd kernels for the same reason, and other
reasons.

Regarding the video, don't waste any money on an add-n PCIe GPU card unless you
plan to play OpenGL games or run professional 3D apps.  All the integrated
northbridge GPUs have more than enough horsepower to drive insanely high 2D
resolutions x 32bpp without breaking a sweat, and most do a decent job with low
demand OpenGL apps.

-- 
Stan



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b81cf7f.9010...@hardwarefreak.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Mark Allums]

On 2/21/2010 5:11 PM, Peter Tenenbaum wrote:

Mark -- thanks for the information!  Your explanation of IA64 vs AMD64
is about what I thought the situation was, but it never hurts to check.

As far as hardware is concerned:  I'm planning to use a Gigabyte
GA-P55-USB3 motherboard, which in turn uses the Intel P55 Express
chipset, the Realtek ALC888 audio chipset, and the Realtek 8111D LAN
chipset.  The Realtek website has linux drivers for both chips updated
in Jan and Feb of this year.  For video I plan to use the Gigabyte
GV-NX84S512HP, which in turn uses nVidia GeForce 8400GS; the nVidia site
has 64 bit linux drivers for that chipset.

Thanks again for your help on this!  Let me know if you can think of
anything I've missed or any other research I should do before placing an
order.

-PT




Realtek audio is covered.  I can't speak to Realtek LAN.  P55 is the 
very latest Intel Northbridge.  I don't know if X servers or drivers yet 
exist for the version of it that supports the Intel GPU, but I'm sure 
that they will exist shortly if they don't already.  Since you plan to 
use NVIDIA, the point is moot.


If you plan to use Debian, you will be wanting to use the 
Debian-packaged versions of most drivers.  These are usually delayed a 
bit from the release of hardware OEM drivers.  There are advantages and 
disadvantages.  The exception might be that you might want to use the 
NVIDIA driver binary if 3D is part of your Linux life.


This itself may change with upcoming kernel releases.  The NVIDIA driver 
has been reverse engineered, and an open source driver is coming.  Of 
course, the open driver may always be behind the closed binary; that 
depends on NVIDIA, and their history is that they want it to stay 
closed, to compete with AMD/ATI.


I tend to prefer ASUS for consumer MBs, but the Giga-Byte board you are 
looking at has gotten mainly favorable reviews.


I *think* you will be okay with it from day one, but a few things may 
not be supported in Linux at first.  I am concerned especially about 
that USB 3.0.  If the board has some regular USB 2.0 ports, you will be 
able to use them, but the 3.0 ports may not work until a future kernel 
release.  This will be true for all boards, not just that one.


Good luck!

Mark Allums





--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b81c727.80...@allums.com

Re: Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Peter Tenenbaum]

Mark -- thanks for the information!  Your explanation of IA64 vs AMD64 is
about what I thought the situation was, but it never hurts to check.

As far as hardware is concerned:  I'm planning to use a Gigabyte GA-P55-USB3
motherboard, which in turn uses the Intel P55 Express chipset, the Realtek
ALC888 audio chipset, and the Realtek 8111D LAN chipset.  The Realtek
website has linux drivers for both chips updated in Jan and Feb of this
year.  For video I plan to use the Gigabyte GV-NX84S512HP, which in turn
uses nVidia GeForce 8400GS; the nVidia site has 64 bit linux drivers for
that chipset.

Thanks again for your help on this!  Let me know if you can think of
anything I've missed or any other research I should do before placing an
order.

-PT

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Mark Allums]

On 2/20/2010 5:18 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:

Peter Tenenbaum put forth on 2/20/2010 4:51 PM:

Hello there --

I am planning to assemble a new computer for my home, and to run debian
linux on it.  I'm planning to use an Intel Core i5-660 CPU in this
computer.  From the documentation, it looks like the correct binary to use
is the AMD64.  Is this right?  Does anyone know of any problems running
debian AMD64 on Intel core-i5 processors?


This is the proper binary for the core i5, but that's the least of your worries.
  Your real concern should focus on whether Debian/Linux has all the drivers for
the various hardware devices on the motherboard and in the expansion slots,
including, but not limited to:

1.  GPU
2.  Network interface
3.  SATA controller
4.  Sound chip



If the MB uses the Intel ICH10 Southbridge, the SATA, at least, will 
work.  If the Northbridge is Intel, as it virtually *must* be with the 
Core i5, the GPU will be okay.  If the GPU is external, then buying an 
AMD/ATI or NVIDIA card will be safe.  Most boards have Marvell NIC 
chips, that's covered.  And sound will almost certainly be Intel Azalia 
HD; that's covered.  I think you'll be fine.


AMD64 is the designation for the 64-bit chip architecture, not the 
actual chip manufacturer.  AMD devised it, and Intel did the sensible 
thing and copied it when they expanded their x86 architecture to 64-bit; 
it was a very good design.


Stay away from the IA64 port.  That's for the Itanium.

Mark Allums



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b80892e.7090...@allums.com

Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

[Stan Hoeppner]

Peter Tenenbaum put forth on 2/20/2010 4:51 PM:
> Hello there --
> 
> I am planning to assemble a new computer for my home, and to run debian
> linux on it.  I'm planning to use an Intel Core i5-660 CPU in this
> computer.  From the documentation, it looks like the correct binary to use
> is the AMD64.  Is this right?  Does anyone know of any problems running
> debian AMD64 on Intel core-i5 processors?

This is the proper binary for the core i5, but that's the least of your worries.
 Your real concern should focus on whether Debian/Linux has all the drivers for
the various hardware devices on the motherboard and in the expansion slots,
including, but not limited to:

1.  GPU
2.  Network interface
3.  SATA controller
4.  Sound chip

-- 
Stan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b806dc9.1040...@hardwarefreak.com