* szukw...@arcor.de [2015-06-19 17:32 +]:
> On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 16:17:14 +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
>
> >What tells (as root)
> >
> ># fdisk -l /dev/sdb
>
> root@g5:~# fdisk -l /dev/sdb
>
> Disk /dev/sdb: 58,9 GiB, 63216549888 bytes, 123469824 sectors
> Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 51
On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 16:17:14 +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
>What tells (as root)
>
># fdisk -l /dev/sdb
root@g5:~# fdisk -l /dev/sdb
Disk /dev/sdb: 58,9 GiB, 63216549888 bytes, 123469824 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O si
* szukw...@arcor.de [2015-06-19 16:01 +]:
> I had installed ppc64 7.6.0. Now I have installed 8.1.0.
>
> Some images were stored on a USB stick. This USB stick
> I had inserted when I installed 8.1.0.
>
> Unfortunately this stick now seems to be reformatted: the
> type is no longer FAT32. I
On 10/5/10, Thibaut VARÈNE wrote:
>
> Are you a Gentoo user? ;^P
>
No because I do not have the steady internet needed and besides I
would wish to do custom build as a group. But I know what you mean
Gentoo lets you auto build everything yourself from scratch.
Its a pain besides that's why I pref
Le 5 oct. 10 à 05:32, Brian Morris a écrit :
On 10/4/10, Wartan Hachaturow wrote:
The same reasoning as before applies -- why would you want to do
this?
What are the benefits compared to multiarch ppc32/ppc64?
If you are using double precision floating point, the speed of a
program comp
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 07:48:43PM -0700, Shyamal Prasad wrote:
> "Sven" == Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Sven> On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 12:33:10PM -0700, Shyamal Prasad
> Sven> wrote:
>
> >> It works. But it is missing the fan control patches from the
> >> sarge
"Sven" == Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Sven> On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 12:33:10PM -0700, Shyamal Prasad
Sven> wrote:
>> It works. But it is missing the fan control patches from the
>> sarge debian kernel, so my fans are going full blast.
Sven> Cool. Sorry about t
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 12:33:10PM -0700, Shyamal Prasad wrote:
> "Sven" == Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Sven> On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 04:15:39PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> >> Hello all,
> >>
> >> Thanks to the great job of Jeff Bailey and Matthias Klose, who
>
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 08:07:35AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 04:15:39PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Thanks to the great job of Jeff Bailey and Matthias Klose, who provided a
> > set
> > of gcc-3.4/glibc-2.3.5 based biarch toolchain, i have managed to
On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 04:15:39PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Thanks to the great job of Jeff Bailey and Matthias Klose, who provided a set
> of gcc-3.4/glibc-2.3.5 based biarch toolchain, i have managed to build a first
> ppc64 kernel package, which is available at :
>
> http:/
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 06:56:18PM -0800, David Schleef wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 11:10:53PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Actually, as i recall, the 64bit code should be slower, since all pointers
> > are
> > now 64bit, and thus you have to transfer double amount of code from the ram
> > a
On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 18:56 -0800, David Schleef wrote:
> I can really only think of two cases where 64-bit code could be
> faster (not that it _would_ be in practise) -- 1) arithmetic on
> 64-bit types, and 2) optimized versions of strlen().
>
> All in all, I'd consider it a wash, and would not
On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 11:10:53PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> Actually, as i recall, the 64bit code should be slower, since all pointers are
> now 64bit, and thus you have to transfer double amount of code from the ram
> and so on.
AIUI, 64-bit powerpc code is generally only slightly larger than
Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 01:59:44PM -0800, Joaquin Menchaca wrote:
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Sun, 2004-12-19 at 13:50 +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
It is of course true that some other distributions put 32 bit libraries
in /usr/lib and 64 bit librar
On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 01:59:44PM -0800, Joaquin Menchaca wrote:
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 2004-12-19 at 13:50 +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>It is of course true that some other distributions put 32 bit libraries
> >>in /usr/lib and 64 bit libraries in /usr/lib
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Sun, 2004-12-19 at 13:50 +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
It is of course true that some other distributions put 32 bit libraries
in /usr/lib and 64 bit libraries in /usr/lib64. I will not follow that
path because for a native 64 bit distribution this will lea
> > I'm still rather unsure of the interest of having the ppc64 distribution
> > be native... Unlike amd64, as I wrote several times, there is no benefit
> > as in more registers etc... All you'll get is bigger/slower code...
>
> What about power3/power4 optimized code, in opposition to generic p
On Sun, Dec 19, 2004 at 03:40:08PM +0100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-12-19 at 13:50 +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
>
> > It is of course true that some other distributions put 32 bit libraries
> > in /usr/lib and 64 bit libraries in /usr/lib64. I will not follow that
> > path bec
On Sun, 2004-12-19 at 13:50 +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> It is of course true that some other distributions put 32 bit libraries
> in /usr/lib and 64 bit libraries in /usr/lib64. I will not follow that
> path because for a native 64 bit distribution this will lead to an
> almost empty /usr/li
On 04-Dec-19 10:27, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> Which means you'll have a different directory layout that all other
> ppc64 distros ...
Gentoo uses basically the same directory layout as the experimental
ppc64 archive on alioth, with the exeception that 32 bit support is
not yet fully workin
On Sun, Dec 19, 2004 at 12:31:51PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-12-19 10:41]:
> > BTW, there is now a ppc64 list on alioth's ppc64 project at :
> > https://alioth.debian.org/mail/?group_id=30565
>
> Why cannot we just have the discussion on the debian-
* Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-12-19 10:41]:
> BTW, there is now a ppc64 list on alioth's ppc64 project at :
> https://alioth.debian.org/mail/?group_id=30565
Why cannot we just have the discussion on the debian-powerpc list?
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
On Sun, Dec 19, 2004 at 10:27:04AM +0100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> > However, it will also be possible to compile and run 32 bit powerpc-linux
> > binaries. This will be achieved by using the '-enable-multilib' gcc
> > switch and by placing the necessary 32 bit powerpc libraries in
> >
> However, it will also be possible to compile and run 32 bit powerpc-linux
> binaries. This will be achieved by using the '-enable-multilib' gcc
> switch and by placing the necessary 32 bit powerpc libraries in
> /usr/lib32.
Which means you'll have a different directory layout that all other
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 09:27:40PM -0200, Rafael Espíndola wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:51:11 +0100, Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have PowerMac G5 1800 MHz with a single processor.
> >
> > I actually started my ppc64 porting efforts because I was
> > not able to install the 3
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 11:09:01PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 22:27, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 10:00:09PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > > On 04-Dec-08 21:27, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 08:51:11PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > >
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:51:11 +0100, Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have PowerMac G5 1800 MHz with a single processor.
>
> I actually started my ppc64 porting efforts because I was
> not able to install the 32 bit Debian powerpc port on that
> machine using the Debian installer from
On 04-Dec-08 22:27, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 10:00:09PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > On 04-Dec-08 21:27, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 08:51:11PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > > When was that, and why did you not help out making sure debian-installer
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 10:00:09PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 21:27, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 08:51:11PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > When was that, and why did you not help out making sure debian-installer
> > worked on your hardware ?
>
> Last time I
On 04-Dec-08 21:27, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 08:51:11PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> When was that, and why did you not help out making sure debian-installer
> worked on your hardware ?
Last time I tried was a few weeks ago. I did not even come to the point
where the kernel
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 07:32:26AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 10:23 -0200, Rafael Espíndola wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 12:44:47 +0100, Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > On 04-Dec-08 11:34, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > I have prepared a patch for
On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 10:23 -0200, Rafael Espíndola wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 12:44:47 +0100, Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 04-Dec-08 11:34, Sven Luther wrote:
> > I have prepared a patch for the glibc package which makes glibc compile
> > and work for ppc64. The patch can be
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 08:51:11PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 20:12, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 07:38:07PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > > I hope that you will succeed with this plan. A ppc64 kernel in sarge
> > > would of course make things _much_ easier
On 04-Dec-08 20:12, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 07:38:07PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > I hope that you will succeed with this plan. A ppc64 kernel in sarge
> > would of course make things _much_ easier for any 64 bit porting efforts
> > regardless of the decisions which hav
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 07:38:07PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 19:09, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Well, the decision if we will go for a native 64 port, or a bi-arch solution
> > has not yet been taken, so ...
>
> I am convinced that in the end there will be a native 64 bit port and
>
On 04-Dec-08 19:09, Sven Luther wrote:
> Well, the decision if we will go for a native 64 port, or a bi-arch solution
> has not yet been taken, so ...
I am convinced that in the end there will be a native 64 bit port and
people will use that one. 32 bit binaries will be legacy and only
used in s
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 05:34:51PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 16:44, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 04:24:02PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > Fully unaware that others are doing a similar effort, and without contacting
> > the debian gcc, glibc and kernel folk,
On 04-Dec-08 16:44, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 04:24:02PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> Fully unaware that others are doing a similar effort, and without contacting
> the debian gcc, glibc and kernel folk, right ?
I did not know and I still do not know about any serious effort
On 04-Dec-08 16:49, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Please send me your alioth user id an I will gladly add you to the project.
>
> luther.
I have just added you as a Project Admin to the debian-ppc64 project.
> But please speak to the debian-glibc and debian-gcc folk about this.
I will speak to them. B
On 04-Dec-08 15:45, Sven Luther wrote:
> Oh, so you created an alioth project, what about inviting people interested in
> the topic to join ?
Of course everybody is invited to join the debian-ppc64 project on alioth.
Please send me your alioth user id an I will gladly add you to the project.
R
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 04:42:16PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 15:45, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Oh, so you created an alioth project, what about inviting people interested
> > in
> > the topic to join ?
>
> Of course everybody is invited to join the debian-ppc64 project on alioth.
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 04:24:02PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 15:36, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 03:31:09PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > > On 04-Dec-08 11:32, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 09:37:05PM -0200, Rafael Esp?ndola wrote:
> > >
On 04-Dec-08 15:36, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 03:31:09PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > On 04-Dec-08 11:32, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 09:37:05PM -0200, Rafael Esp?ndola wrote:
> > > > I agree that it is very important to be able to run 32 binaries, but a
On 04-Dec-08 11:32, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 09:37:05PM -0200, Rafael Esp?ndola wrote:
> > I agree that it is very important to be able to run 32 binaries, but a
> > pure64 port is simpler and can be a good starting point for a
>
> Well, given that most debian powerpc people ha
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 12:44:47PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 11:34, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 11:03:37AM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > > For my ppc64 porting efforts, I have patched Debian glibc up to current
> > > CVS. I had to sort out which of the 120
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 03:31:09PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 11:32, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 09:37:05PM -0200, Rafael Esp?ndola wrote:
> > > I agree that it is very important to be able to run 32 binaries, but a
> > > pure64 port is simpler and can be a good
On 04-Dec-08 10:23, Rafael Esp?ndola wrote:
> I was using gcc-3.4 and a much smaller (attached) patch was enough to
> build it. I agree that it is better to upgrade llibc but a simple
> patch can be merged first.
>
> Is there some big problem the in current debian glibc that I haven't hit?
I also
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 12:44:47 +0100, Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 11:34, Sven Luther wrote:
> I have prepared a patch for the glibc package which makes glibc compile
> and work for ppc64. The patch can be found at
>
> http://debian-ppc64.alioth.debian.org/gcc4/patches/gl
On 04-Dec-08 11:34, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 11:03:37AM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> > For my ppc64 porting efforts, I have patched Debian glibc up to current
> > CVS. I had to sort out which of the 120 Debian patches still apply
> > and found that about 90 of them are alre
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 11:03:37AM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 10:56, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > I'm pretty confident that the benchmarks will show a significant benefit
> > in having userland mostly 32 bits tho.
>
> I made some tests and compared a 32 bit powerpc
> chroot
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 09:37:05PM -0200, Rafael Espíndola wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 09:35:25 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> ...
> >On the other hand, ppc64 is pretty much
> > just that: same core, same amount of registers, just things running in
> > 64 bits mo
On 04-Dec-08 10:56, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> I'm pretty confident that the benchmarks will show a significant benefit
> in having userland mostly 32 bits tho.
I made some tests and compared a 32 bit powerpc
chroot environment with a 64 bit ppc64 chroot environment on a
PowerMac G5 running
> With pure64 gentoo and experimental debian chroots I think that it is
> now possible to run some benchmarks (suggestions?).
>
> I agree that it is very important to be able to run 32 binaries, but a
> pure64 port is simpler and can be a good starting point for a
> multiarch if 64bits is the defa
On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 09:35:25 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
...
>On the other hand, ppc64 is pretty much
> just that: same core, same amount of registers, just things running in
> 64 bits mode, which tend to mean slightly larger code, and thus slightly
> slower as well.
On Sat, 2004-12-04 at 01:03 +0100, Juergen Kreileder wrote:
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Thus, it's been common so far to run ppc64 machines with a mostly 32
> > bits distribution, plus biarch libraries & toolchain.
>
> How do other distributions handle 64-bit kernel
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thus, it's been common so far to run ppc64 machines with a mostly 32
> bits distribution, plus biarch libraries & toolchain.
How do other distributions handle 64-bit kernel <-> 32-bit user land
problems (e.g. with missing XFS compat ioctls, ALS
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 08:17:10PM -0200, Rafael Espíndola wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:02:47 +0100, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 04:46:59PM -0200, Rafael Ávila de Espíndola wrote:
> > > Hi, I have done some work on porting debian to the powerpc64. The origin
> Correct me if I am wrong but I think the amd64 started as a pure64 and
> is now adding multiarch support. A pure ppc64 may be a god starting
> point.
ppc64 is a different story. In the case of amd64, the 64 bits mode does
provide significant improvements, like adding more registers etc...
which
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:02:47 +0100, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 04:46:59PM -0200, Rafael Ávila de Espíndola wrote:
> > Hi, I have done some work on porting debian to the powerpc64. The original
> > post:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2004/10/msg00193
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 04:46:59PM -0200, Rafael Ávila de Espíndola wrote:
> Hi, I have done some work on porting debian to the powerpc64. The original
> post:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2004/10/msg00193.html
We have also been working silently on it ...
> I also made some bug repor
On 04-Dec-02 16:46, Rafael ?vila de Esp?ndola wrote:
> Hi, I have done some work on porting debian to the powerpc64. The original
> post:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2004/10/msg00193.html
>
> I also made some bug reports to add support for the powerpc architecture. One
> missing is
On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 09:51:28AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 19:49, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 12:56:15AM -0700, ed crumly wrote:
> > > i would like to know if there's anyway i can help, as i do have in my
> > > possession a 1.6ghz G5 mac. it
On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 19:49, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 12:56:15AM -0700, ed crumly wrote:
> > i would like to know if there's anyway i can help, as i do have in my
> > possession a 1.6ghz G5 mac. it is stoked up with 2 gig of ram, 2
>
> Ok, welcome.
>
> Can you please try ou
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 12:56:15AM -0700, ed crumly wrote:
> i would like to know if there's anyway i can help, as i do have in my
> possession a 1.6ghz G5 mac. it is stoked up with 2 gig of ram, 2
Ok, welcome.
Can you please try out the 2.4.25-4 power4-pmac kernel, and confirm that
it works o
On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 07:03, Mahesh B wrote:
>
> Is there any way to build 64 bit XFree86 for my system. Is there any
> patch for this?
See
http://freedesktop.org/pipermail/xorg-commit/2004-March/000534.html
for example.
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI de
65 matches
Mail list logo
