Re: A stupid 64bit question ... but ...
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 08:13:50AM +0100, Guillaume R. wrote: > 2005/12/5, David O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 06:50:55PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > > > > I recently bought a new Intel Xeon server, and when I put it together, I > > > didn't realize that the newer Xeon's were 64bit ... now, I've just built > > > perl 5.8.7, and its reporting: > > > > > > = > > > # perl -v > > > This is perl, v5.8.7 built for i386-freebsd-64int > > .. > > > I realize that this may be a stupid question, but am I correct in that > > > *this* is a 64bit machine, and I should be enabling the AMD64 stuff on > > > her? > > > > Perl won't be reporting a 64-bit capable machine, when running a 32-bit > > OS. Look in /var/run/dmesg for 'AMD Features' to report 'LM' (long > > mode). > > Lo > So why there is a 64int? We can suppose that perl has seen that Marc's proc > is a 64 one no? > I asked that cause I got a 64bits (amd) which run on a 32 bits mode and I > got oftenly such "i386-freebsd-64amd" > ++ I'm not a perl expert - but maybe ints in perl actually are 64-bit. Just because an x86 has only 32-bit wide regs, doesn't mean it cannot do 64-bit math. :-) -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is top-posting (putting a reply at the top of the message) frowned upon? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Linux emulation on amd64, possible yet? ... plausible?
On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 01:32:04PM -0400, Nathan Vidican wrote: > MSG In-short: what is, or where do I find info on, the current status of > linux binary compatability on FreeBSD/amd64 platform 32-bit x86 Linux binaries should run just fine on FreeBSD/AMD64 5.4 or later. You will have to install the linux_base port. For FreeBSD 5.4 you need to install the 32-bit libs thru a 'make world'. Later versions will have them offered by Sysinstall. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: CPU speed not reported correctly
On Wed, Dec 29, 2004 at 04:25:55PM -0500, Michael W. Oliver wrote: > CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3400+ (801.83-MHz K8-class CPU) .. > OK, here is my question: Why is the CPU speed reported as 801.83MHz? > Is there something really wrong with my setup here? I have this machine > configured to dual boot with the other OS being the x64 version of XP, > and it reports a 2.2GHz CPU (for what it's worth...). You've some how gotten your Athlon64 processor in Cool-n-Quiet (ie, PowerNOW) cool, low-power mode. If you do a cold boot into FreeBSD, what CPU speed is reported? By chance is this a laptop and not a desktop. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: OT: Upgrade feasibility, to AMD64/5.x.x or to stay i386/4.9 on AMD64 hardware?
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 12:01:21AM +0200, Francois Tigeot wrote: > > Here's what we're proposing for the new hardware: > > > > AMD Athlon64 - 3200+ (Socket 754 - I know, but it's cheap) > > MSI K8T-FSR (VIA Chipset) > > 2048MB DDR400 Non-ECC RAM > > In my experience trying to put more than 1GB RAM in a socket-754 mainboard > is asking for trouble. This type of board is incredibly picky about its > memory, especially when using more than two DIMMs. PC3200 by chance? DDR400 is has very close tolerances. I can easily used 3x PC2700 DIMMs in my socket-754 boards (that have 3 DIMM slots). The real message though, is to use DIMMs recommended by your motherboard manufacturer vs. what ever random crap RAM is in sale on pricewatch.com. If you do that, you can have 2048MB of DDR400 memory in an Athlon64 machine. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: OT: Upgrade feasibility, to AMD64/5.x.x or to stay i386/4.9 on AMD64 hardware?
On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 10:07:44PM +0200, Eirik ?verby wrote: > >Hey all, looking to upgrade a server used in a small business here, > >looking for opinions and advice about migrating to an AMD64 system, > >vs. using i386 box, also if it would not be just as feasible to use > >i386 distribution on AMD64 hardware simply for the speed? It is very feasible to run FreeBSD/i386 on AMD64 hardware. I encourage you to go ahead and move to AMD64 hardware regardless what version of FreeBSD you decide to run for now. You will get excellent performance, and you will have a 64-bit upgrade path when you decide to move 32-bit -> 64-bit. > >Here's what we're proposing for the new hardware: > >AMD Athlon64 - 3200+ (Socket 754 - I know, but it's cheap) > >MSI K8T-FSR (VIA Chipset) > >Adaptec AAC-2410SA 4-Port S-ATA RAID Controller > > This one is gonna be tricky on you, I think. The driver used for most > Adaptec RAID controllers (IDE and SCSI alike) isn't currently working > on amd64 (in 64-bit mode, that is). I have repeatedly asked if anyone > will step up to the task and fix that, You're really exaggerating here. There are two families of Adaptec RAID controllers -- aac and asr. 'aac' family controllers are quite popular and are the higher performing of the two families. The AAC-2410SA 4-Port S-ATA RAID Controller uses the aac(4) driver and the driver very much works on 64-bit machines. > as I have an Adaptec Zero-Channel RAID add-on-board for my dual opteron > just collecting dust at the moment, but the general answer is 'no > time'... Too bad. The Adaptec Zero-channel products are from the other product family. That particular driver has issues. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 01:17:35AM -0400, Kenneth Culver wrote: > Quoting Doug White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >Me either. -current actually supports running i386 binaries in amd64 mode. > >Thats one of the processor's features. :-) > > >You can't run amd64 binaries when booted into an i386 OS, of course. > > Yeah you can run x86 but you cant' go into regular 32 bit mode that's all. ENOPARSE, can you please restate this? -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: AMD64 vs i386 for FreeBSD
On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 02:37:54PM -0700, Remi wrote: > Im in the market for a new laptop. Right now I'm looking at HyperSonic > laptops. > > I have a choice between AMD64 3200+ and a P4 2.8GHz with HT. Which one would > you guys recommend to run FreeBSD. Obviously the i386 would be easier to > run, so I guess my question is what is the state of the AMD64 FreeBSD > version? You do know you can run FreeBSD/i386 on the Athlon64 3200+ laptop, right? :-) A 3200+ running 32-bit FreeBSD will out-perform the P4 2.8GHz running the same OS. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Fwd: Call For Assistance #4 - slapd won't die gracefully, multiple versions.
On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 07:23:44AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 11:44:25AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote: > > > In the mean time, you need a work-around. I'm not sure if you can run > > FreeBSD 5.x in 32bit mode on an AMD64 box, but that might be a thing > > to try. > > You can...it runs just like a more expensive i386 box :-) Opteron isn't any more expensive than a 32-bit Intel Xeon i386 box :-) -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Which architecture?
On Fri, Jan 02, 2004 at 10:45:51AM -0800, Nate Lawson wrote: > Not to mention it's impossible to find clock frequencies on amd.com. Agreed, the easiest public way I've found is: goto http://ask.amd.com/ select Desktop, Server, Workstation Processor Products search "CPU specs" ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Which architecture?
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 12:06:06PM -0800, Nate Lawson wrote: > AMD, Cyrix. The amd64 arch is for the new 64 bit Opterons (i.e. FX64). What is "FX64"??? "Opteron" is the server 64-bit CPU "Athlon64 FX51" is the high-end desktop CPU "Athlon64" is the desktop CPU -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Dualbooting STABLE & CURRENT
On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 01:26:10PM -0800, Steve Wingate wrote: > STABLE taking the entire first disk (works fine) > CURRENT taking the first 1/3 of the second disk and > backup data taking the remaining 2/3 of the second disk. > > I have installed CURRENT (at least 8 times) but I cannot get it to boot. > Choosing F1 on booteasy boots STABLE. Choosing F5 boots nothing but it > then shows an F2 entry for FreeBSD. I choose F2 and nothing happens. I > have tried boot easy on the first disk, the second disk, both disks and > nothing seems to work. I have tried making both slices making bootable and > every possible derivative I can think of. What am I missing here? What exact steps did you take to set this up? Also please boot into some version of FreeBSD and post the output of: fdisk da0 disklabel da0s1 fdisk da1 disklabel da1s1 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Grub 0.92 fails to recognise disks on FBSD5
On Sun, Feb 09, 2003 at 06:14:30PM +0100, Matthias Schuendehuette wrote: > Nothing against 'booteasy', it does the job - but it looks ugly :-) If that is the only reason to use grub, try osbsbeta.exe that is in the tools directory of your CDROM or ftp.freebsd.org. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
