Shawn Haggett wrote:
There's two points that come to mind.
1) mtune is a request for the compiler to make the code more suited to
the given processor, but without breaking compatibility. march is
telling the compiler, do everything you can to make this code fastest
on this processor.
From
Anthony Metcalf wrote:
Alan McKinnon wrote:
Now the existing system should work with your new hardware and you can
update your CFLAGS and 'emerge -e world' at your leisure.
That's the theory at least anyway :-)
Well, exactly. That is the theory. I want to know the likelihood of
success. I
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 16:02:50 +0100, Anthony Metcalf wrote:
If you have the time before the transition, you could set CFLAGS to
something really generic, like -mcpu=i586 and emerge -e system, as well
as recompiling the kernel. Then move the disks over. That way, you'll
k
On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 16:02:50 +0100, Anthony Metcalf wrote:
> Well, exactly. That is the theory. I want to know the likelihood of
> success. I know that using mtune=k6-2 means it won't run on anything
> before a k6-2, and most likely not on anything Intel, due to the
> symbols and optimisations u
Alan McKinnon wrote:
OK, so it's 32 bit on an amd64 you'll be doing
Initially yes, I'll look into 64bit as need arises.
I would reconfigure the kernel and include things that you know ought to
be there. Then move the disks over and see if it boots. Rinse, repeat,
till it does.
Wel
On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 15:43 +0100, Anthony Metcalf wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Tuesday 08 April 2008, Anthony Metcalf wrote:
> >
> >> � � But what else? Will mtune=k6-2 make executables that will run on
> >> an Athlon 64? Anyone tried this? Would I get to a point where I could
> >> mak
On Tuesday 08 April 2008, Anthony Metcalf wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Tuesday 08 April 2008, Anthony Metcalf wrote:
> >> � � But what else? Will mtune=k6-2 make executables that will run
> >> on an Athlon 64? Anyone tried this? Would I get to a point where I
> >> could make -e world and ha
On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 15:43:16 +0100, Anthony Metcalf wrote:
> Later when I upgrade to a phenom, and stick 1GB RAM per core in there,
> then yeah, I will probably recompile into 64bit, but that can be done
> in a chroot, and migrated fairly easily I would expect, so long as the
> system is running
Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Tuesday 08 April 2008, Anthony Metcalf wrote:
� � But what else? Will mtune=k6-2 make executables that will run on
an Athlon 64? Anyone tried this? Would I get to a point where I could
make -e world and have a nice working system?
k6 is 32 bit right?
There's no
On Tuesday 08 April 2008, Anthony Metcalf wrote:
> But what else? Will mtune=k6-2 make executables that will run on
> an Athlon 64? Anyone tried this? Would I get to a point where I could
> make -e world and have a nice working system?
k6 is 32 bit right?
There's no sane upgrade path to amd64
Hi All,
An interesting theoretical question. I have a K6-2 with a SATA card
sitting in it, with two drives, which are happily soft-mirrored, with
LVM layered on top, and a nice big iSCSI partition that gets shared to
my laptop whenever it's home.
It runs postfix (with all the assoc
11 matches
Mail list logo
