On Jan 10, 2011, at 11:25 AM, Santi Saez wrote:
> El 09/01/2011 16:31, Robert Heller escribió:
>
>> The kernel itself is optimized for the i686 processor. It is possible
>> to custom build a kernel for the i586, i486, or i386 if you really have
>> a processor that old.
>
> What is the sense of
At Mon, 10 Jan 2011 18:25:22 +0100 CentOS mailing list
wrote:
>
> El 09/01/2011 16:31, Robert Heller escribió:
>
> > The kernel itself is optimized for the i686 processor. It is possible
> > to custom build a kernel for the i586, i486, or i386 if you really have
> > a processor that old.
>
El 09/01/2011 16:31, Robert Heller escribió:
> The kernel itself is optimized for the i686 processor. It is possible
> to custom build a kernel for the i586, i486, or i386 if you really have
> a processor that old.
What is the sense of optimize a kernel for i686 and then distribute most
of pack
>> Don't forget AMD's K6 processors -- these are also i586 processors.
>
> I have an AMD K6 that won't boot Fedora 7 (or later) due to missing
> some bit of architecture (I forget specifics, sorry...). So I suspect
> it's not truly an i586 processor? (fwiw, It did boot and install Linux
> Mint 9,
On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Cia Watson wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Jan 2011 14:54:21 -0500
> Robert Heller wrote:
>
>> At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 11:19:22 -0800 CentOS mailing list
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > On 01/09/11 11:09 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>> > > And highly, highly recommended to use a kernel opt
On Sun, 9 Jan 2011 14:54:21 -0500
Robert Heller wrote:
> At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 11:19:22 -0800 CentOS mailing list
> wrote:
>
> >
> > On 01/09/11 11:09 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > > And highly, highly recommended to use a kernel optimized for i686
> > > if that's your real architecture: ther
On Jan 9, 2011, at 10:31 AM, Robert Heller wrote:
> At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 09:31:19 -0500 CentOS mailing list
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Hi List,
>> just doing my weekly yum update and noticed that the kernel is
>> designated .i686 but the headers package is .i386??
>> surely the headers should mat
On 01/09/2011 03:31 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
> The headers package contains no compiled code -- it only contains
> source code (.h files). As such it is processor netural. It really
> could be '.noarch', but the version of rpmbuild shipped with CentOS 5.5
> does not allow the creation of .noarch
At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 11:19:22 -0800 CentOS mailing list
wrote:
>
> On 01/09/11 11:09 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > And highly, highly recommended to use a kernel optimized for i686 if
> > that's your real architecture: there's a big performance difference.
>
> since the last mainstream i586
On 01/09/11 11:09 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> And highly, highly recommended to use a kernel optimized for i686 if
> that's your real architecture: there's a big performance difference.
since the last mainstream i586 CPU was the original Pentium (60-133Mhz)
and Pentium/MMX (up to 200Mhz?), and
On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Robert Heller wrote:
> At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 09:31:19 -0500 CentOS mailing list
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Hi List,
>> just doing my weekly yum update and noticed that the kernel is
>> designated .i686 but the headers package is .i386??
>> surely the headers should match
At Sun, 09 Jan 2011 09:31:19 -0500 CentOS mailing list
wrote:
>
>
> Hi List,
> just doing my weekly yum update and noticed that the kernel is
> designated .i686 but the headers package is .i386??
> surely the headers should match the kernel geometry that it was compiled
> for?
> confused.
T
12 matches
Mail list logo
