On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:24:38PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell, le Tue 22 Nov 2011 16:19:03 -0500, a écrit :
> > Josselin Mouette is apparently easily amused.
> >
> > He harasses me every time I use debian-devel mailing list, apparently
> > automaticall (which is illegal in my country - though for now it's ok).
> >
> >
> > Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > Or in legacy; I've read about wishes of their own patent problems,
> > > capice? But ads a login can get out and having to be opensuse deeply
> > > compatible yet high unix efficient, Switching to all the road? Grub and
> > > having to maintain and inodes would be my slice single project need
> > > change if MIS USED by I already prepared considering hardware and drive
> > > in his response; mail, btw i've read most filesystem blocking code for
> > > demanding offered proof that i've read about the right arch; the tomb of
> > > each of my guess.
>
> This looks random stuff to me. Not something that Josselin would write.
> I'd rather bet on a spammer using random "From:".
No, it's commentary on the rambling style and mostly irrelevant
content of messages from "John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell".
This entity claims to be required to send all its messages to the
same mailing list due to some interaction between its own mail
server and its ISP's outgoing spam filter.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
- Albert Camus
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20111122214123.GT3366@decadent.org.uk">http://lists.debian.org/20111122214123.GT3366@decadent.org.uk
11-22-2011, 09:43 PM
Josselin Mouette
Increasing minimum 'i386' processor
Le mardi 22 novembre 2011 à 16:19 -0500, John D. Hendrickson and Sara
Darnell a écrit :
> Josselin Mouette is apparently easily amused.
I am afraid that text cannot convey my feelings adequately, so please
find here a more appropriate reply:
http://malsain.org/~joss/amused.jpg
Rest assured that my next contribution to a conversation you are part of
might not be for the list but for its masters.
Kthxbye,
--
.'`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'
`-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 1322001810.6897.8.camel@tomoyo">http://lists.debian.org/1322001810.6897.8.camel@tomoyo
11-22-2011, 09:56 PM
Christoph Egger
Increasing minimum 'i386' processor
Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> writes:
>> Does /proc/cpuinfo with the exist on non-Linux architectures? If
>> yes, do they use the same format?
>
> It is Linux-specific, but included in FreeBSD's Linux compatibility module.
> I don't know whether Debian kFreeBSD loads that by default.
It is loaded. /proc/cpuinfo on field (kfreebsd-i386 buildd):
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 16
model name : Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.80GHz
stepping : 10
processor : 1
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 16
model name : Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.80GHz
stepping : 10
processor : 2
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 16
model name : Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.80GHz
stepping : 10
processor : 3
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 16
model name : Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.80GHz
stepping : 10
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 b19 b21 mmxext mmx fxsr xmm sse2 b27 b28 b29 3dnow
cpu MHz : 3800.15
bogomips : 3800.15
It's subjectively quite different from linux/x86 but the same is true
for e.g. s390
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87lir73gx4.fsf@hepworth.siccegge.de">http://lists.debian.org/87lir73gx4.fsf@hepworth.siccegge.de
11-22-2011, 10:44 PM
Matthias Klose
Increasing minimum 'i386' processor
On 11/19/2011 11:42 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> The i386 architecture was the first in Linux and in Debian, but we have
> long since dropped support for the original i386-compatible processors
> and now require a minimum of a 486-class processor.
>
> I think it is time to increase the minimum requirement to 586-class, if
> not for wheezy then immediately after.
note that squeeze is built this way, and single packages like openjdk only build
for 586.
> (Later it should be increased
> further, and eventually i386 should be reduced to a partial architecture
> that may be installed on amd64 systems.) This would allow the use of
> optimisations and new instructions throughout userland that improve
> performance for the vast majority of users.
could you give numbers what kind of improvements you would expect? The biggest
burden for i386 is the register pressure, which you won't fix with targeting a
newer processor. The better approach would be a new port, the x32 architecture;
I don't know if anybody did look into building a distribution for this
architecture yet. The next thing could be to default to sse2 math instead of
x87 (didn't look if this is already the default for x32).
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4ECC33CD.7040403@debian.org">http://lists.debian.org/4ECC33CD.7040403@debian.org
11-22-2011, 10:44 PM
Matthias Klose
Increasing minimum 'i386' processor
On 11/19/2011 11:42 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> The i386 architecture was the first in Linux and in Debian, but we have
> long since dropped support for the original i386-compatible processors
> and now require a minimum of a 486-class processor.
>
> I think it is time to increase the minimum requirement to 586-class, if
> not for wheezy then immediately after.
note that squeeze is built this way, and single packages like openjdk only build
for 586.
> (Later it should be increased
> further, and eventually i386 should be reduced to a partial architecture
> that may be installed on amd64 systems.) This would allow the use of
> optimisations and new instructions throughout userland that improve
> performance for the vast majority of users.
could you give numbers what kind of improvements you would expect? The biggest
burden for i386 is the register pressure, which you won't fix with targeting a
newer processor. The better approach would be a new port, the x32 architecture;
I don't know if anybody did look into building a distribution for this
architecture yet. The next thing could be to default to sse2 math instead of
x87 (didn't look if this is already the default for x32).
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4ECC33CD.7040403@debian.org">http://lists.debian.org/4ECC33CD.7040403@debian.org
11-22-2011, 10:44 PM
Matthias Klose
Increasing minimum 'i386' processor
On 11/19/2011 11:42 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> The i386 architecture was the first in Linux and in Debian, but we have
> long since dropped support for the original i386-compatible processors
> and now require a minimum of a 486-class processor.
>
> I think it is time to increase the minimum requirement to 586-class, if
> not for wheezy then immediately after.
note that squeeze is built this way, and single packages like openjdk only build
for 586.
> (Later it should be increased
> further, and eventually i386 should be reduced to a partial architecture
> that may be installed on amd64 systems.) This would allow the use of
> optimisations and new instructions throughout userland that improve
> performance for the vast majority of users.
could you give numbers what kind of improvements you would expect? The biggest
burden for i386 is the register pressure, which you won't fix with targeting a
newer processor. The better approach would be a new port, the x32 architecture;
I don't know if anybody did look into building a distribution for this
architecture yet. The next thing could be to default to sse2 math instead of
x87 (didn't look if this is already the default for x32).
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4ECC33CD.7040403@debian.org">http://lists.debian.org/4ECC33CD.7040403@debian.org
11-22-2011, 10:48 PM
Matthias Klose
Increasing minimum 'i386' processor
On 11/20/2011 01:08 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sat, 2011-11-19 at 22:42:11 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> The i386 architecture was the first in Linux and in Debian, but we have
>> long since dropped support for the original i386-compatible processors
>> and now require a minimum of a 486-class processor.
>>
>> I think it is time to increase the minimum requirement to 586-class, if
>> not for wheezy then immediately after. (Later it should be increased
>> further, and eventually i386 should be reduced to a partial architecture
>> that may be installed on amd64 systems.) This would allow the use of
>> optimisations and new instructions throughout userland that improve
>> performance for the vast majority of users.
>
> It seems gcc has been targetting i586 instruction set by default since
> gcc 4.4.0-1~exp1, although the triplet was not changed to match. On the
> discussion regarding multiarch tuples I proposed we should switch the
> triplet back to i386-linux-gnu to avoid this kind of confusion, fix the
> internal inconsistency and the one with other architectures (which do
> not track the base instruction set in the triplet) and so that we can
> use them directly as the multiarch tuples.
>
> For more details please see:
>
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2011/02/msg00061.html>
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2011/02/msg00039.html>
No, that's wrong. i386-linux-gnu has a different ABI for at least some libraries
(libstdc++) than i486-linux-gnu. Unfortunately the proposal to use
ix86-linux-gnu for the i386 multiarch triplet didn't find a consensus.
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4ECC34E9.6090600@debian.org">http://lists.debian.org/4ECC34E9.6090600@debian.org
11-22-2011, 10:48 PM
Matthias Klose
Increasing minimum 'i386' processor
On 11/20/2011 01:08 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sat, 2011-11-19 at 22:42:11 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> The i386 architecture was the first in Linux and in Debian, but we have
>> long since dropped support for the original i386-compatible processors
>> and now require a minimum of a 486-class processor.
>>
>> I think it is time to increase the minimum requirement to 586-class, if
>> not for wheezy then immediately after. (Later it should be increased
>> further, and eventually i386 should be reduced to a partial architecture
>> that may be installed on amd64 systems.) This would allow the use of
>> optimisations and new instructions throughout userland that improve
>> performance for the vast majority of users.
>
> It seems gcc has been targetting i586 instruction set by default since
> gcc 4.4.0-1~exp1, although the triplet was not changed to match. On the
> discussion regarding multiarch tuples I proposed we should switch the
> triplet back to i386-linux-gnu to avoid this kind of confusion, fix the
> internal inconsistency and the one with other architectures (which do
> not track the base instruction set in the triplet) and so that we can
> use them directly as the multiarch tuples.
>
> For more details please see:
>
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2011/02/msg00061.html>
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2011/02/msg00039.html>
No, that's wrong. i386-linux-gnu has a different ABI for at least some libraries
(libstdc++) than i486-linux-gnu. Unfortunately the proposal to use
ix86-linux-gnu for the i386 multiarch triplet didn't find a consensus.
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4ECC34E9.6090600@debian.org">http://lists.debian.org/4ECC34E9.6090600@debian.org
11-22-2011, 10:48 PM
Matthias Klose
Increasing minimum 'i386' processor
On 11/20/2011 01:08 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sat, 2011-11-19 at 22:42:11 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> The i386 architecture was the first in Linux and in Debian, but we have
>> long since dropped support for the original i386-compatible processors
>> and now require a minimum of a 486-class processor.
>>
>> I think it is time to increase the minimum requirement to 586-class, if
>> not for wheezy then immediately after. (Later it should be increased
>> further, and eventually i386 should be reduced to a partial architecture
>> that may be installed on amd64 systems.) This would allow the use of
>> optimisations and new instructions throughout userland that improve
>> performance for the vast majority of users.
>
> It seems gcc has been targetting i586 instruction set by default since
> gcc 4.4.0-1~exp1, although the triplet was not changed to match. On the
> discussion regarding multiarch tuples I proposed we should switch the
> triplet back to i386-linux-gnu to avoid this kind of confusion, fix the
> internal inconsistency and the one with other architectures (which do
> not track the base instruction set in the triplet) and so that we can
> use them directly as the multiarch tuples.
>
> For more details please see:
>
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2011/02/msg00061.html>
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2011/02/msg00039.html>
No, that's wrong. i386-linux-gnu has a different ABI for at least some libraries
(libstdc++) than i486-linux-gnu. Unfortunately the proposal to use
ix86-linux-gnu for the i386 multiarch triplet didn't find a consensus.
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4ECC34E9.6090600@debian.org">http://lists.debian.org/4ECC34E9.6090600@debian.org
11-23-2011, 09:27 AM
Goswin von Brederlow
Increasing minimum 'i386' processor
Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> writes:
> On 11/19/2011 11:42 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> The i386 architecture was the first in Linux and in Debian, but we have
>> long since dropped support for the original i386-compatible processors
>> and now require a minimum of a 486-class processor.
>>
>> I think it is time to increase the minimum requirement to 586-class, if
>> not for wheezy then immediately after.
>
> note that squeeze is built this way, and single packages like openjdk only build
> for 586.
>
>> (Later it should be increased
>> further, and eventually i386 should be reduced to a partial architecture
>> that may be installed on amd64 systems.) This would allow the use of
>> optimisations and new instructions throughout userland that improve
>> performance for the vast majority of users.
>
> could you give numbers what kind of improvements you would expect? The biggest
> burden for i386 is the register pressure, which you won't fix with targeting a
> newer processor. The better approach would be a new port, the x32 architecture;
> I don't know if anybody did look into building a distribution for this
> architecture yet. The next thing could be to default to sse2 math instead of
> x87 (didn't look if this is already the default for x32).
>
> Matthias
Where the relevant patches added to binutils and gcc for this?
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87obw3w2uc.fsf@frosties.localnet">http://lists.debian.org/87obw3w2uc.fsf@frosties.localnet
Increasing minimum 'i386' processor
