FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-08-2008, 07:30 AM
"Gianluca Sforna"
 
Default i586 kernels

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@freenet.de> wrote:
> Actually, my old i586 system works quite smoothly with FC8 and better it
> did with some older Fedoras.
>

Last time I tried (around FC6) I was not able to use Fedora for one
little i586 class box¹ I have around due to the absence of a
corresponding kernel.

Did something change (e.g. the i586 variant is built again) or am I
missing something else?


¹ http://www.norhtec.com/products/mcjr/index.html

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-08-2008, 08:47 AM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default i586 kernels

On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 09:30 +0200, Gianluca Sforna wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@freenet.de> wrote:
> > Actually, my old i586 system works quite smoothly with FC8 and better it
> > did with some older Fedoras.
> >
>
> Last time I tried (around FC6) I was not able to use Fedora for one
> little i586 class box¹ I have around due to the absence of a
> corresponding kernel.
I've been hit by this bug myself ca. during the FC6/FC7 time-frame.
AFAICT, the cause had been a bug somewhere in installer , which had
caused installing on i586 to install the wrong (i686) kernel.

[User visible symptoms had been the installer installing i686 packages,
and using some i686 tls glibc stuff - There is a BZ somewhere.
AFAICT, this is fixed in FC8.]

> Did something change
Yes, plenty has changed between FC6 and FC8.

Noteworthy:
* FC8 yum uses much less memory than its predecessors.
* This silly installer-bug finally has been fixed.
* Packaging is more granular.
* rpm has been improved (FC6's rpm/yum occasionally killed the rpmdb)

Other tricks I am applying:
* selinux=0 - The amount of memory SELinux uses, causes kernel-OOMs
early while booting.
* sufficient swap - My i586 uses 128MB (2xRAM, inherited from this
machine's past). More swap probably is advisable.
* boot into runlevel 3 (way less memory consuming than runlevel 5).
Switch off everything you don't really need (e.g. rhgb, usb,
NetworkManager, PulseAudio, avahi, etc.).
* Disable yum-updatesd - I update this machine by manually running yum,
occasionally running selective updates (Occasionally, update-floods tend
to cause OOMs).
* Slim down the static installation (number of packages) and dynamic
installation (daemons/services) to your personal "required" minimum.
Fedora's default configuration is pretty generous.

> (e.g. the i586 variant is built again)
AFAICT, it has always been built.

> or am I missing something else?
Bring along a lot of time ... installation/updates are really slow

Ralf



--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-08-2008, 10:49 AM
Jesse Keating
 
Default i586 kernels

On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 09:30 +0200, Gianluca Sforna wrote:
> Last time I tried (around FC6) I was not able to use Fedora for one
> little i586 class box¹ I have around due to the absence of a
> corresponding kernel.
>
> Did something change (e.g. the i586 variant is built again) or am I
> missing something else?

FC6 may have had a bug where it didn't properly detect you as i586 and
didn't install the right kernel. That should be fixed, alas I don't
have any i586 class hardware to test that.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-08-2008, 02:55 PM
Mike Cronenworth
 
Default i586 kernels

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: i586 kernels [Was: very common kernel modules slow down
the boot process]

From: Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@freenet.de>
To: Development discussions related to Fedora <fedora-devel-list@redhat.com>
Date: 04/08/2008 03:47 AM


On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 09:30 +0200, Gianluca Sforna wrote:

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@freenet.de> wrote:

Actually, my old i586 system works quite smoothly with FC8 and better it
did with some older Fedoras.


Last time I tried (around FC6) I was not able to use Fedora for one
little i586 class box¹ I have around due to the absence of a
corresponding kernel.

I've been hit by this bug myself ca. during the FC6/FC7 time-frame.
AFAICT, the cause had been a bug somewhere in installer , which had
caused installing on i586 to install the wrong (i686) kernel.

[User visible symptoms had been the installer installing i686 packages,
and using some i686 tls glibc stuff - There is a BZ somewhere.
AFAICT, this is fixed in FC8.]


Did something change

Yes, plenty has changed between FC6 and FC8.

Noteworthy:
* FC8 yum uses much less memory than its predecessors.

* This silly installer-bug finally has been fixed.
* Packaging is more granular.
* rpm has been improved (FC6's rpm/yum occasionally killed the rpmdb)

Other tricks I am applying:
* selinux=0 - The amount of memory SELinux uses, causes kernel-OOMs
early while booting.
* sufficient swap - My i586 uses 128MB (2xRAM, inherited from this
machine's past). More swap probably is advisable.
* boot into runlevel 3 (way less memory consuming than runlevel 5).
Switch off everything you don't really need (e.g. rhgb, usb,
NetworkManager, PulseAudio, avahi, etc.).
* Disable yum-updatesd - I update this machine by manually running yum,
occasionally running selective updates (Occasionally, update-floods tend
to cause OOMs).
* Slim down the static installation (number of packages) and dynamic
installation (daemons/services) to your personal "required" minimum.
Fedora's default configuration is pretty generous.


(e.g. the i586 variant is built again)

AFAICT, it has always been built.


or am I missing something else?

Bring along a lot of time ... installation/updates are really slow



Not to sound *too* negative, but is there a donation fund where I can
put $5 so you guys with i586s can upgrade? Good lord.


I'm sure if you melted down the gold, copper, and steel in the i586
computers you guys have you could *easily* afford a Core 2 Quad with 4
gigs of DDR2.



Ralf





--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-08-2008, 03:11 PM
Alan Cox
 
Default i586 kernels

> Not to sound *too* negative, but is there a donation fund where I can
> put $5 so you guys with i586s can upgrade? Good lord.

The 586 aspect isn't a big problem. It needs some trivial kernel differences
which increasingly are being done by run time fixup. The installer is fine
if there is enough memory. I did need to use a respin disk but that was no
big deal. The VIA isn't really a 586 but a 686, it is however hit by a gcc
machine specification bug that isn't really fixable as stuff now relies on the
broken gcc definition of 686.

> I'm sure if you melted down the gold, copper, and steel in the i586
> computers you guys have you could *easily* afford a Core 2 Quad with 4
> gigs of DDR2.

Yes but it wouldn't run on under 60 watts, silently including the tft and
disks. The VIA EPIA boxes are very good for that sort of thing and they
save a lot in power costs.

Alan

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-08-2008, 03:15 PM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default i586 kernels

On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 09:55 -0500, Mike Cronenworth wrote:

> >> or am I missing something else?
> > Bring along a lot of time ... installation/updates are really slow
> >
>
> Not to sound *too* negative, but is there a donation fund where I can
> put $5 so you guys with i586s can upgrade? Good lord.
>
> I'm sure if you melted down the gold, copper, and steel in the i586
> computers you guys have you could *easily* afford a Core 2 Quad with 4
> gigs of DDR2.
What you are missing: There are other aspects besides "being able to
afford a Core 2 Quad", ...

... if I were interested in running a "multimedia desktop" (which I
presume is the direction certain folks are trying to drive Fedora into),
I'd probably use Vista or buy a Mac.

Ralf



--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-08-2008, 06:38 PM
Mike Cronenworth
 
Default i586 kernels

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: i586 kernels [Was: very common kernel modules slow down
the boot process]

From: Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@freenet.de>
To: Development discussions related to Fedora <fedora-devel-list@redhat.com>
Date: 04/08/2008 10:15 AM


On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 09:55 -0500, Mike Cronenworth wrote:


or am I missing something else?

Bring along a lot of time ... installation/updates are really slow

Not to sound *too* negative, but is there a donation fund where I can
put $5 so you guys with i586s can upgrade? Good lord.


I'm sure if you melted down the gold, copper, and steel in the i586
computers you guys have you could *easily* afford a Core 2 Quad with 4
gigs of DDR2.

What you are missing: There are other aspects besides "being able to
afford a Core 2 Quad", ...

... if I were interested in running a "multimedia desktop" (which I
presume is the direction certain folks are trying to drive Fedora into),
I'd probably use Vista or buy a Mac.



Going further OT here.

So you wish to say Linux isn't "multimedia competent?" Tell that to any
number of Hollywood movie studios that use Linux to produce their
movies. If anything, Linux is *more* powerful with media content (video,
audio, and pictures) than Windows or OS X. If you take the time to
research it as I did, you will find the same result. You will be
limiting yourself by using Vista or a Mac. You may think I'm some
righteous Linux "zealot" by saying this, but I'm not making up stories.
It doesn't benefit me in any way to lie. Linux runs in my HDTV at home,
and it also runs on some of the largest and fastest super computers in
the world. Calling Linux as not being "multimedia aware" is foolish.


P.S. Replace Linux with Fedora where appropriate. Fedora is flexible
enough that you could strip out Gnome (I do) and other components to get
down to an RPM install with a kernel and whatever else may please you.
You can thank all the people on this list (inc. Red Hat) for that.



Ralf





--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-08-2008, 07:07 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default i586 kernels

Mike Cronenworth wrote:



... if I were interested in running a "multimedia desktop" (which I
presume is the direction certain folks are trying to drive Fedora into),
I'd probably use Vista or buy a Mac.



Going further OT here.

So you wish to say Linux isn't "multimedia competent?"


It isn't 'Linux' that is the relevant issue. It is more that Microsoft
and Apple aggregate all of the patented and copyrighted materials that
are typically needed for multimedia operations and roll the cost into
the total for the OS and apps. Linux distributors typically don't, and
in the GPL world there really isn't a business model that can
accommodate the concept of fairly sharing the expenses of something that
isn't free but could be very cheap in a mass-market distribution.


> Tell that to any
number of Hollywood movie studios that use Linux to produce their
movies.


Or ask them what it cost them in terms of customization to do what they
want and decide if you'd rather have something that did everything you
want out of the box.


P.S. Replace Linux with Fedora where appropriate. Fedora is flexible
enough that you could strip out Gnome (I do) and other components to get
down to an RPM install with a kernel and whatever else may please you.
You can thank all the people on this list (inc. Red Hat) for that.


The mechanics aren't quite the point. How do you get licensed/legal
versions of all the components at bulk pricing rates? Is there even
such a thing for DVD playing on linux where software patents and the
DMCA are observed?


--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-08-2008, 08:10 PM
Mike Cronenworth
 
Default i586 kernels

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: i586 kernels [Was: very common kernel modules slow down
the boot process]

From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com>
To: Development discussions related to Fedora <fedora-devel-list@redhat.com>
Date: 04/08/2008 02:07 PM


Mike Cronenworth wrote:



... if I were interested in running a "multimedia desktop" (which I
presume is the direction certain folks are trying to drive Fedora into),
I'd probably use Vista or buy a Mac.



Going further OT here.

So you wish to say Linux isn't "multimedia competent?"


It isn't 'Linux' that is the relevant issue. It is more that Microsoft
and Apple aggregate all of the patented and copyrighted materials that
are typically needed for multimedia operations and roll the cost into
the total for the OS and apps. Linux distributors typically don't, and
in the GPL world there really isn't a business model that can
accommodate the concept of fairly sharing the expenses of something that
isn't free but could be very cheap in a mass-market distribution.


Not everything patented and copyrighted is "absolute" in the multimedia
world. Just look around and you'll find plenty of the tools you'll want
to use under Windows originated under Linux - legal or not.




> Tell that to any

number of Hollywood movie studios that use Linux to produce their movies.


Or ask them what it cost them in terms of customization to do what they
want and decide if you'd rather have something that did everything you
want out of the box.


Windows does everything out of the box? Since when?

The same money "spent" on customizing a Linux software piece is also
spent on Windows licenses and licenses for the software that runs under
Windows -- compare the two prices as the Hollywood editors did and
you'll find that the Linux switch was very much financially sound. By
comparing you'll see it's not that cheap under OS X or Windows to
license a few hundred computers for rendering.




P.S. Replace Linux with Fedora where appropriate. Fedora is flexible
enough that you could strip out Gnome (I do) and other components to
get down to an RPM install with a kernel and whatever else may please
you. You can thank all the people on this list (inc. Red Hat) for that.


The mechanics aren't quite the point. How do you get licensed/legal
versions of all the components at bulk pricing rates? Is there even
such a thing for DVD playing on linux where software patents and the
DMCA are observed?




Yes. A quick Google search would have told you so.

http://www.dvd-recordable.org/Article1087-mode=thread-order0-threshold0.phtml
http://www.cyberlink.com/eng/press_room/view_970.html

And there's more... but this isn't the time.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 04-08-2008, 08:38 PM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default i586 kernels

On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 13:38 -0500, Mike Cronenworth wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: i586 kernels [Was: very common kernel modules slow down
> the boot process]
> From: Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@freenet.de>
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora <fedora-devel-list@redhat.com>
> Date: 04/08/2008 10:15 AM
>
> > On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 09:55 -0500, Mike Cronenworth wrote:
> >
> >>>> or am I missing something else?
> >>> Bring along a lot of time ... installation/updates are really slow
> >>>
> >> Not to sound *too* negative, but is there a donation fund where I can
> >> put $5 so you guys with i586s can upgrade? Good lord.
> >>
> >> I'm sure if you melted down the gold, copper, and steel in the i586
> >> computers you guys have you could *easily* afford a Core 2 Quad with 4
> >> gigs of DDR2.
> > What you are missing: There are other aspects besides "being able to
> > afford a Core 2 Quad", ...
> >
> > ... if I were interested in running a "multimedia desktop" (which I
> > presume is the direction certain folks are trying to drive Fedora into),
> > I'd probably use Vista or buy a Mac.
> >
>
> Going further OT here.
>
> So you wish to say Linux isn't "multimedia competent?"
No, I am not saying this.

I say *Fedora* has taken a road which is leading away from where Linux
has had it's genuine domains and which had made Linux interesting.

Fedora is on the road to become a single-user, single-seat operating
system only being suitable for high end machines. It's things like
multi-user capabilities and deployment to "recycled low end hardware"
which I feel are going down the drain.

Ralf


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:53 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org