Re: Why are there only i686 and i586 Version of glibc and kernel? -- not "older systems," "older ISAs"
by Bryan Smith
Matthew Miller wrote:
> Enough people seem to care about keeping older-system support in Core,
> and I don't care enouigh about moving it out, that I going to just
> drop this for now. No point in arguing.
Just FYI, it's not about "older systems." It's about "older ISAs."
Some of these embedded x86 processors are very fast, have all the latest
"toys" around them, but are very low power, with everything in a single
chip. The way they do this is with an older ISA.
IDT-Centaur's original WinChip, which ran well over 200MHz (up to
300MHz?), was actually a non-pipelined 486 ISA, with a massive (at the
time) amount of cache. It was not only cheaper to make, but took less
than 18 months to design, and worked with standard 3.3V signaling.
A lot of companies licensed that design for use in their own products
(STMicro?). IDT-Centaur is also a major MIPS partner, so doing this was
nothing new to them. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to find out a lot
of companies did, and have 6th-Gen equivalent performing x86 cores that
are only 486 ISA compatible.
The rule of thumb is, everything that can be built for 386 ISA, should
be built for it. Optimize for 686 architectures (PPro/II+, Athlon,
etc...), but make it 386 ISA compatible. If that is not possible (e.g.,
NPTL), then 486 ISA.
--
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. -- b.j.smith(a)ieee.org
19 years, 11 months
P2 CPU "class," but 386/486 ISA "core" are commonplace -- WAS: i586/686 glibc/kernel
by Bryan Smith
This isn't about making a "lite" distro.
Fedora "Core" _should_ continue to ship with the _same_ performance,
memory and storage requirements.
I'm talking about not assuming that a 100MHz+ system has a Pentium ISA
(instruction set architecture) compatible CPU or higher. Most people
seem to assume this, when there are a _lot_ of systems that don't.
A _lot_ of 100MHz+ CPUs.
We're talking a "system-on-a-chip" that eats up maybe 1-2Ws, or maybe
hundreds of milliwatts. But they run at 133MHz or even higher, have
32-bit or even 64-bit memory bus interfaces, support even 128Mbit SDRAM
technology (upto 512MB of SDRAM) and have peripherials up the wazzu on
the chip itself (PCI masters, ATA100, PCCard/PCMCIA, USB, etc...).
But the ISA is often only a 486 or lower! Even when the product is sold
as 5th-Gen (Pentium) or 6th-Gen (Pentium II) "class" chip!
Now AMD has licensed National Semi's Geode products. The Geode are the
Cyrix M2 core, which are Pentium ISA. These are quickly commonplace.
But AMD was is still selling its E86/SCLAN series too (and was its
_only_ product for awhile), which kicks some serious butt at 133MHz,
with lots of on-board peripherials.
Same deal with STMicro and others. These are _huge_ in Europe, as well
as non-US markets, and a lot of imports into the US as well. STMicro is
notorious for marketing them as "Pentium/Pentium-II" class because they
run at 100MHz, have 64-bit memory busses, PCI, ATA, USB, etc...
support. But underneath, the _majority_ of STMicro products are i486
ISA.
These systems are all over the place. In black boxes atop of your TV
that have 128MB+ of RAM, 10-20GB disks, etc... Serious power.
That's why I'm all for making the distro i686 optimized, but i386 ISA
compatible. With x86-64 being adopting this year, there is little
reason to start worrying about "performance." x86-64 distros will be
optimized to the max, because x86-64 is a whole new architecture.
But for plain Jane x86, there is little sense to break i386 ISA
compatibility. Yes, _assume_ the "performance/memory/disk" equivalent
of a Pentium Pro/II or higher. But leave the instruction set
compatibility (ISA) at i386 -- please, for Fedora adoption sake.
--
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. -- b.j.smith(a)ieee.org
19 years, 11 months
Re: Why are there only i686 and i586 Version of glibc and kernel? -- not "lite," "Core" capable systems
by Bryan Smith
Matthew Miller wrote:
> I've been suggesting it. Or, not dumping it, but making those systems
> be the focus of a Fedora Lite instead of Fedora Core. But it seems to
> be vastly unpopular.
No, we're talking systems that _are_ capable of running Fedora _Core_.
We're talking settop boxes, notepads, inventory devices, military
interfaces, etc... stuff with _full_ GUIs! Stuff that has 128MB+ of
RAM, a 20GB+ disk (typically 2.5" or even 1") and wireless networking.
We're talking _modern_ applications!
The only exception is the "core" of the sub-2W SoC is typically a 486
ISA. At the same time, its performance spanks a Pentium Pro silly!
> Sure, but they're by their nature not normal desktop systems --
> they're special purpose devices. Right? Having Linux running on them
> is cool; I just don't see it as a market for _core_.
Huh? If an engineer likes Fedora, he's most likely going to want to use
Fedora as a base for these devices. If a device is capable of using a
popular distro, it _will_. Fedora is _ideal_ for these applications!
We're not talking "Having Linux running on them is cool" -- these
devices are _already_ running Linux _now_! _Millions_ already!
> And my point is -- if you don't see them, then I don't think they're
> what FC is aimed at anyway.
AFAICT, Fedora Core is aimed at providing a community that shares a
popular distro. The distro is aimed at people who have systems that are
at least 5th/6th generation "class" performance, 128MB+ RAM and a hard
drive.
I'm not taking about accomodating any "lite" systems. That's what
MontaVista and other "embedded" Linux systems do.
No, I'm talking about an, again, 5th/6th generation "class" performing
device, 128MB+ RAM and a hard drive. They have GUIs, are used for
It's a crapload easier to not only build but, more importantly,
_maintain_ (which is 80% of the engineering cycle) the distribution. If
they can tap Fedora Core, then it's 99% easier.
I'm not advocating changing Core (that's for another project ;-). But
darn it, why oh why don't you guys realize that there are literally
millions of systems running Linux _now_ that have a 486 ISA?
Not some "old" system that needs Fedora "Lite," but one with 128MB+ RAM,
a hard drive, a GUI and performance that smacks a Pentium Pro silly.
--
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. -- b.j.smith(a)ieee.org
19 years, 11 months
Re: Why are there only i686 and i586 Version of glibc and kernel? -- more "mainstream" or "popular"?
by Bryan Smith
Matthew Miller wrote:
> Okay. "Older" isn't the right word. "Non-mainstream PC" maybe.
> You mention embedded x86 processors -- that's exactly my point.
I _swear_ this is _not_ meant to be argumentative.
But you mention "mainstream." What does that mean?
If it means "more popular," I'm not sure that's a good term.
Because there are a _crapload_ of these systems out there
(literally millions, probably 30% already running Linux).
It wouldn't hurt if Fedora booted on this if possible.
They have the performance, memory and disk required.
As long as the software can be built for the ISA, I say leave it be.
There's a good reason to aim for 386 ISA, 486 ISA if needbe. 686 still
makes a nice optmization, as long as 386/486 is still the target ISA.
That's all my point is. 486 ISA is still quite commonplace, even if you
don't see the millions of systems where it's at.
--
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. -- b.j.smith(a)ieee.org
19 years, 11 months
Rebuilding Arjan's kernel-*.src.rpm
by Chris Kloiber
Is there a new magic rpmbuild option to make the kernel-sourcecode
and/or kernel-doc in the same run as making kernel-smp and kernel?
Perhaps some combination of --target= ? If built at different times,
will the kernel-sourcecode be useful for building additional modules if
needed, or have the kernel headers necessary been added into the kernel
and kernel-smp rpms?
--
Chris Kloiber
19 years, 11 months
rawhide report: 20040602 changes
by Build System
Updated Packages:
anaconda-10.0.1-0.20040602002947
--------------------------------
* Wed Jun 02 2004 Anaconda team <bugzilla(a)redhat.com>
- built new version from CVS
* Fri Apr 30 2004 Jeremy Katz <katzj(a)redhat.com>
- Update description, remove prereq on stuff that was only needed
for reconfig mode
* Tue Feb 24 2004 Jeremy Katz <katzj(a)redhat.com>
- buildrequire libselinux-devel
arts-1.2.2-4
------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Karsten Hopp <karsten(a)redhat.de> 1.2.2-4
- remove -O0 on ia64
cups-1.1.20-13
--------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Tim Waugh <twaugh(a)redhat.com> 1:1.1.20-13
- Enable optimizations on ia64 again.
gettext-0.14.1-3
----------------
* Wed Jun 02 2004 Leon Ho <llch(a)redhat.com>
- packaged lib files for devel
- moved some of the files to different sub-pkg
- fix problem on x86_64 build
gkrellm-2.2.0-1
---------------
* Mon May 31 2004 Warren Togami <wtogami(a)redhat.com> 2.2.0-1
- upgrade to 2.2.0
- #123846 bogus dep
- Cleanup deps, build deps, and docs
jcode.pl-2.13-10
----------------
* Wed Jun 02 2004 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> 2.13-10
- no noarch anymore. (#124756)
kernel-2.6.6-1.406
------------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Arjan van de Ven <arjanv(a)redhat.com>
- refresh ext3 reservation patch
libdv-0.102-2
-------------
* Sun May 30 2004 Warren Togami <wtogami(a)redhat.com> 0:0.102-2
- Bug #123367 -devel Req gtk+-devel
mpage-2.5.4-1
-------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Tim Waugh <twaugh(a)redhat.com> 2.5.4-1
- 2.5.4.
ncurses-5.4-7
-------------
* Sun May 30 2004 Florian La Roche <Florian.LaRoche(a)redhat.de>
- remove ncurses-c++-devel rpm, all files are also part of ncurses-devel
* Sat May 29 2004 Joe Orton <jorton(a)redhat.com> 5.4-6
- fix xterm terminfo entry (Hans de Geode, #122815)
openssh-3.6.1p2-35
------------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Daniel Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 3.6.1p2-35
- Remove CLOSEXEC on STDERR
rpm-4.3.2-0.1
-------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Jeff Johnson <jbj(a)jbj.org> 4.3.2-0.1
- use /etc/selinux/targeted/contexts/files/file_contexts for now.
- disable file contexts into package metadata during build.
- fix: dev package build on s390x hack around.
- fix: "/path/foo.../bar" was losing a dot (#123844).
- fix: PIE executables have basename-as-soname provides (#123697).
- add aurora/sparc patches (#124469).
- use poll(2) if available, avoid borked aurora/sparc select (#124574).
rpmdb-fedora-2-0.20040602
-------------------------
selinux-policy-strict-1.13.2-4
------------------------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 1.13.2-4
- Fix hotplug and udev
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 1.13.2-3
- Fix handling of selinux_config_t and default_context_t
selinux-policy-targeted-1.13.2-4
--------------------------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 1.13.2-4
- Fix hotplug and udev
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 1.13.2-3
- Fix handling of selinux_config_t and default_context_t
spamassassin-3.0-0.0.svn20040530
--------------------------------
* Mon May 31 2004 Warren Togami <wtogami(a)redhat.com> - 3.0-svn20040530
- svn snapshot 20040530
- #124870 prevent service startup failure due to old -a option
- #124871 more docs
- #124872 unowned directories
sylpheed-0.9.11-1
-----------------
* Mon May 31 2004 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> 0.9.11-1
- New upstream release.
system-config-printer-0.6.100-1
-------------------------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Tim Waugh <twaugh(a)redhat.com> 0.6.100-1
- 0.6.100:
- Set LANG=C before running /usr/sbin/alternatives (bug #124217).
vnc-4.0-1.beta5.6
-----------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Tim Waugh <twaugh(a)redhat.com> 4.0-1.beta5.6
- Turn ppc64 builds on again.
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Tim Waugh <twaugh(a)redhat.com> 4.0-1.beta5.5
- Exclude ppc64 until the build machine is fixed.
- Undo last vnc.def change to get vnc.so back.
wvdial-1.53-14
--------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Karsten Hopp <karsten(a)redhat.de> 1.53-14
- remove -O0
xfce4-panel-4.0.5-4
-------------------
* Tue Jun 01 2004 Than Ngo <than(a)redhat.com> 4.0.5-4
- add buildrequires on startup-notification-devel, bug #124948
- use %find_lang macros, bug #124948
* Mon May 31 2004 Than Ngo <than(a)redhat.com> 4.0.5-3
- own %{_libdir}i/xfce4, bug #124826
xmms-1.2.10-3.p
---------------
* Mon May 31 2004 Warren Togami <wtogami(a)redhat.com> 1:1.2.10-3.p
- #124701 -devel req gtk+-devel
19 years, 11 months
Strange dial-up Internet question
by Steven P. Ulrick
Hello, Everyone :)
If this is off topic, I do apologize, but I assure you that I have tried
everything imagineable to figure out this problem, with no success so
far. I figure with all the brilliant minds on this list, that someone
may have some wisdom for me :)
The problem is this:
Sometimes when I attempt to connect to the Internet, the KPPP login
screen will give me a message about there being "NO DIAL TONE" (Kppp's
emphasis, not mine) I'll go downstairs, get our cordless phone, and
guess what? There most definitely IS a dial tone. So, I go back
upstairs with the phone, which leads me to believe we have a dial tone,
and attempt to connect to the Internet. Guess what? "NO DIAL TONE" I
figured out, apparently in a moment of inspiration, that if I attempt to
connect to the Internet with the phone turned on (the talk button pushed
to "on", just like I was going to call someone) that I can connect to
the Internet every time! If I go through all that, turn the phone on
and connect to the Internet, and then shut the phone off, I still remain
connected to the Internet. I must add at this point that even though it
will connect with the phone turned on, it connects at a pretty slow
speed (example: 26400 as opposed to our norman 45333+) I have also
discovered that if I unplug the phone completely from the jack that it's
plugged into in the kitchen, that I cannot connect to the Internet.
One of the frustrating things about this is that the problem is
intermittent. For example, I just had a guy from the phone company come
out and he replaced our network interface box on the side of the house
(it had been hit by lightning) Well, I couldn't get this problem to
occur, for the purpose of showing it to him. I also assumed that
because our interface box had been fried that that could have been the
cause of what I described above. I just discovered that this is not the
case :( I am sitting here typing this with our cordless phone on,
connected at a speed of only 26400, with a new network interface box on
the outside of our house, and a brand new U.S. Robotics 56k v92 Internal
PCI Fax/Voice modem in our computer, and the problem persists.
If anyone has ever run up against a problem like this, I would love to
have your wisdom on this. If you feel this is off topic, I would prefer
that you would contact me off list, unless you feel your response could
help someone else.
To summarize, here are the things I've done to try to fix this:
1. New modem, as described above.
2. Had the phone company come out, and they replaced the network
interface box outside.
I will have my dad look at the inside wiring again, but I think that he
already did that.
In closing, I know that this might seem really weird, having to have a
phone turned on to be able to connect to the Internet, but I am NOT
making this up!
Anyway, thanks in advance for any wisdom you may be able to give me on
this :)
Steven P. Ulrick
19 years, 11 months
Using a non-default file system in the "minimal installation"
by Martin Olsson
Hi,
It would be nice if one could choose to use reiserfs (or any other file
system) when doing a minimal installation WITHOUT having the disk3
available. I mean, alot of users want to choose minimal install and then
apt-get/yum home their packages later on, but the file system is
something you really want from scratch so it should be possible (and
practical) to use a non-default file system in the minimal install.
Therefore I suggest that file systems util packages etc be moved from
disk3 (and wherever they reside atm) to disk1.
Where can I find the list of packages that is included in the Fedora
Core 2 minimal installation?
Regards,
/m
19 years, 11 months