opteron 64-bit isos?

[C Moss]

On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 10:19:47AM -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 10:54:09AM -0500, C Moss wrote:
> > Any more details available on this?
> > 
> > Specifically what forward progress has been made?
> > 
> The kernel is much closer now, it boots on AMD64 systems, AGPgart, DMA
> mode, ATA133 for NF3 chipsets works, and the needed ia32syscalls have been
> implemented.  Particularly what is left is:
> 
> - Fix futex issue (Required for Test release)
> - SATA support for Sil (Desired, but not required)
> 
> > What approach has been taken?
> > 
> - davej did the initial work to merge the required nptl changes, etc to
>   AMD64
> - We began working on missing pieces, drivers, etc for a stable working
>   kernel, see status above for what is left as a *must*
> - I have set up a distro tree with the required 32bit compat libs and
>   applications which are required for one reason or another (Open Office,
>   32bit mozilla for plugins), and 64bit for everything else.
> - Fix, build, test...repeat 

Is this based on the 2.4.22 kernel?

> 
> > Who is working on this?
> > 
> Currently Dave Jones and Myself, with direction from Michael Johnson, and
> input from developers on IRC and emails.
> 
> > What can we do to help/test?
> > 
> Hopefully a pre-test1 (may cause dmg, use at your own risk, etc) tree will
> be made axfvailaxvble sooni for the brave, otherwise, wait for an announcement of test1 isos
> being made available.

I hope to have a dual opteron 12 gb machine back in my hands this
Friday.  At that point I would love to dive into the test process.
Since nothing is running on it now file corruptions/ destroyed installs are 
not an issue.  RHEL does not work on this with the full complement of ram
so I am hoping that an updated kernel and fedora with squash some relevent 
bugs. ;-)

> 
> > Is <http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/development/x86_64/>
> > the best place to track development?
> > 
> Not really, this is what used to be the old Rawhide tree, our current AMD64
> tree is in synch with FC1 plus updates in a released or test state.  That
> development tree is from the build system, and not necessarily reflective
> of the AMD64 FC1 tree.

I assume this is hosted on a non-public server, correct.

> 
> > I don't see much x86_64 traffic on the lists at the moment,
> > which list would be most active re: amd64
> > 
> There has been little traffic as of late, but expect to see traffic here
> when test1 is made available.

I bet. ;-)

Chuck