Dear maintainers,
there is a dependency problem with the latest package xserver-xorg-core and
nvidia-glx. As both packages seem (as installed alone) to be o.k., IMO it is
not really a bug.
Both packages exclude each other, so one of the both packages should be
corrected. As I do not know,
On Tuesday 18 September 2007, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote:
Dear maintainers,
there is a dependency problem with the latest package xserver-xorg-core and
nvidia-glx. As both packages seem (as installed alone) to be o.k., IMO it
is not really a bug.
Both packages exclude each other, so one of the
Am Dienstag 18 September 2007 schrieb Jan De Luyck:
On Tuesday 18 September 2007, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote:
Dear maintainers,
there is a dependency problem with the latest package xserver-xorg-core
and nvidia-glx. As both packages seem (as installed alone) to be o.k.,
IMO it is not really
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
I only ever use my chroot to run mplayer occasionally now. (Especially
with nspluginwrapper allowing Flash to be used from a 64-bit browser.)
My two main desktops (home and work) are both 64-bit.
Which leads me to the question: which video formats needs w32plugins
Zaq Rizer wrote:
I have an Intel Core2 Duo arriving in the mail in a couple of days,
and I read online that these processors can run in either 32bit or
64bit mode (just like Athlons can).
Thing is, the 32bit chroot and ia32-compatibility libraries, are, imo,
a total mess and a real pain in
On 09/18/07 08:21:23AM -0300, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
I only ever use my chroot to run mplayer occasionally now. (Especially
with nspluginwrapper allowing Flash to be used from a 64-bit browser.)
My two main desktops (home and work) are both 64-bit.
Which
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 09:44:03AM +0200, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote:
there is a dependency problem with the latest package xserver-xorg-core and
nvidia-glx. As both packages seem (as installed alone) to be o.k., IMO it is
not really a bug.
Both packages exclude each other, so one of the both
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 02:18:34PM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
My experimental sudoku solving program is 3x faster on
a 1.8GHz 64-bit opteron, than on a 2.4GHz 32-bit pentium. In this case,
a slow 64-bit processor beats a faster 32-bit processor 3x.
And an athlon64 3500+ (2.2GHz) runs bzip2 5x
2007/9/18, Jim Crilly [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 09/18/07 08:21:23AM -0300, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
I only ever use my chroot to run mplayer occasionally now. (Especially
with nspluginwrapper allowing Flash to be used from a 64-bit browser.)
My two main desktops
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 02:35:30PM +0100, Jo Shields wrote:
And in case anyone's not keeping up at the back: Pentium 4 and Core 2
have nothing whatsoever in common, other than the ability to run x86
code. Core 2 is a screamingly fast chip, Pentium 4 wasn't
Absolutely. My current cpu of choice
On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 10:07 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 02:35:30PM +0100, Jo Shields wrote:
And in case anyone's not keeping up at the back: Pentium 4 and Core 2
have nothing whatsoever in common, other than the ability to run x86
code. Core 2 is a screamingly
On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 09:29 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 02:18:34PM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
My experimental sudoku solving program is 3x faster on
a 1.8GHz 64-bit opteron, than on a 2.4GHz 32-bit pentium. In this case,
a slow 64-bit processor beats a faster
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 02:18:34PM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
My experimental sudoku solving program is 3x faster on
a 1.8GHz 64-bit opteron, than on a 2.4GHz 32-bit pentium. In this case,
a slow 64-bit processor beats a faster 32-bit processor 3x.
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 03:08:48PM +0100, Jo Shields wrote:
Or more? Buy an Altix! ;)
Ehm, well the Altix uses either the itanium (why would anyone want that
crap) or a dual socket core 2 based cpu. That hardly matches a 4 or
more cpu opteron server.
SGI has nothing of any real interest. No
On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 10:41 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 03:08:48PM +0100, Jo Shields wrote:
Or more? Buy an Altix! ;)
Ehm, well the Altix uses either the itanium (why would anyone want that
crap) or a dual socket core 2 based cpu. That hardly matches a 4 or
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 03:51:34PM +0100, Jo Shields wrote:
Let's assume I have large examples of both IA64 and AMD64. Plus further
benchmark data we collected ourselves.
IA64 is fast, for floating point code. On paper, it offers the same
per-core-per-Hz FLOP count as Core (twice that of
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 09:45:42AM -0400, Zaq Rizer wrote:
/pre
/blockquote
Thank you both for the advice.nbsp; I am compiling a new preempt/cfs kernel
with Intel/core2-specific instructions, and will stick with my -amd64
installation.nbsp; Don't fix it if it ain't
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 11:16:14AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
Well if you need something to do floating point, then x86 isn't
generally where you want to be. And yes if performance matters gcc is
not what you want to use either.
Is there a free alternative to GCC?
Where would you go
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 04:22:35PM -0400, Zaq Rizer wrote:
and increase the tickrate, and enable preemption. None of which, afaik,
can I do with any Debian packaged kernels.
Why is it that debian doesn't do pre-emption in the kernel?
Doug.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
thanks for that, it was hiding up in eth5 for some reason
*shrug* and dmesg didnt bother to tell me
i will have to set it to a more reasonable eth number
Dean
Jonas Bardino wrote:
Dean Hamstead wrote:
any thoughts why a forcedeth (nvidia) onboard nic would be
detected, but not presented as a
20 matches
Mail list logo
