Just a little side note, although enough info might have been given out
already...
I have a K6-2/500 system (actually a 550@6x83) running at 2.2v core. It
runs very fast and has tracked stable for a few months now, building about
every week or so. I decided as of 4.1.1-R to stop this wasting of time,
and built that. 4.1.1-R is built and has been running very stable for a
week now.
I can also agree with others that a good heatsink/fan combo and either
conducting grease or pads are a MUST with this chip. With a good amount of
grease on mine, it runs fine even without the fan, but I didn't like the
idea of this just to save a little bit more of my ear drums.
On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Jeff Duffy wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
>
> >If this was a software error, however, one would think more than just
> >a couple of people would be running into it. -stable builds just fine
> >on multiple test boxes I have here, and that encompasses everything
> >from Celerons to Athlons.
>
> I agree. I was just waiting for someone who had a successful buildworld
> of 4.1.1-STABLE on a K6-II or K6-III to speak up (since these were the
> two CPUs in question). I assume (and correct me if I'm wrong) that Jordan
> is saying that he has done just that. Given, I'm sure he knows the issues
> better than I.
>
> While I look for cooling issues on the K6-III, I'm still going to try a
> 4.1-STABLE and a 4.1.1-STABLE buildworld on another K6-II 500 machine I
> have, to generate some empirical data on the issue. If both compile
> cleanly, I'll post the info so at least I can kill the thread I
> helped start :)
>
> If the 4.1.1-STABLE build fails in the same place however, can I assume
> that that would be interesting data?
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
