[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: which kernel for dual opteron ???

helices wrote:


* Jo Shields <jo.shields@comlab.ox.ac.uk> [2006:05:31:14:12:17+0100] scribed:
<snip />

Thank you, for your participation in these matters.


I recommend application of common sense.


Please, be patient with me.

I am trying to get my brain around this whole amd64 thing.  This is not
immediately intuitive to me, especially since everything is in motion,
and so many things are changing simultaneously.


I've already stated why you might already have a 2.6.15 system


Yes, I understand that.  However, I used this to install:

   debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso

I am under the impression that this is integral to the recent
subsumption of amd64 into the standard debian repository; and,
therefore, that I should follow this standard repository for
etch/testing.

Today, you advised that the kernel that that ISO installed did NOT come
from the standard repository.

I am confused.  What am I missing?


(requirement for a newer kernel for hardware reasons),


OK, I understand what you wrote there; but, how could I have guessed
that from your previous message?

So, is that the whole story; that my system requires kernel
functionality NOT available prior to 2.6.15 ???  If I know this, then
much else follows naturally ...


that backports.org has 2.6.15 kernels on it,


Yes, you did make that clear.

Is the backports.org path preferable to debian standard `experimental'?
WHY?  Is this documented somewhere?  I have not found any FAQ regarding
this ...

Sometime in my i386 past, I ended up with a totally messed up system, by
following backports.org, and later trying to upgrade back into standard
repository, once newer packages were available there.  That, to my
simple mind, was NOT a good `application of common sense' ;<


and that the kernel ending in -amd64-k8-smp is appropriate for you.


OK.  I was not even sure about `smp', because I have read something
stating that my system is not exactly `smp'; rather, something more
parallel than symmetric -- but, I probably misunderstood this?


You misunderstood. More than 1 core -> SMP kernel. End of story.


Fill in the blanks.


Thank you.  You obviously have been doing this amd64 stuff for quite
some time!  I am the newbie.  As a newbie, I try very hard to err on the
side of caution; until such time as I know enough to be dangerous.  Am I
there yet?



Nothing so far is AMD64-specific.
The list of kernels you got from dpkg showed 2.6.8 and 2.4.27 - these are from Debian Sarge (stable). If you do not wish to run Debian Sarge (stable), then you need to alter your /etc/apt/sources.list file to point to a valid Etch or Sid server, in which case valid linux-image packages will be shown, including an SMP kernel for your hardware. If you *DO* want to run Debian Sarge, then you want to either use an SMP kernel from Sarge (i.e. 2.6.8-12-amd64-k8-smp, if it fully supports your hardware), or an SMP kernel *for* Sarge, i.e. from backports.org (linux-image-2.6.15-1-amd64-k8-smp). 

Nothing so far is AMD64-specific.
If you are running a server, as intended for a production service, then you are STRONGLY recommended to run a stable service - i.e. using Debian Sarge (stable). If you are running a desktop machine for your own use, then you may consider using Etch (testing) or Sid (unstable), which frequently break. 

Nothing so far is AMD64-specific.
Now, the AMD64-specific part. Debian Sarge, officially, supports 12 architectures - which does NOT include AMD64. Debian Etch *DOES* support AMD64, but has not yet been released, and like any work in progress, is highly prone to issues. There exists an unofficial port of Debian Sarge to AMD64, as obtainable from amd64.debian.net - this is, however, potentially home to unforseen bugs. I run a production service using Unofficial AMD64 Sarge, but your mileage may vary.
Reply to: