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

Re: kernel 2.6 difference between g4 and powerpc kernel



On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 09:55:47AM -0600, Peter Spuhler wrote:
> I have a dual CPU grey-green tower Mac which i was under the impression was a 
> G4. I'm having issues running the G4 flavor of kernel 2.6
> cat /proc/cpuinfo returns
> processor       : 0
> cpu             : 7400, altivec supported
> temperature     : 31-33 C (uncalibrated)
> clock           : 450MHz
> revision        : 2.9 (pvr 000c 0209)
> bogomips        : 894.97
> 
> processor       : 1
> cpu             : 7400, altivec supported
> temperature     : 39-41 C (uncalibrated)
> clock           : 450MHz
> revision        : 2.9 (pvr 000c 0209)
> bogomips        : 894.97
> 
> total bogomips  : 1789.95
> machine         : PowerMac3,3
> motherboard     : PowerMac3,3 MacRISC Power Macintosh
> detected as     : 65 (PowerMac G4 AGP Graphics)
> pmac flags      : 00000004
> L2 cache        : 1024K unified
> memory          : 256MB
> pmac-generation : NewWorld
> 
> Anyways i tried running kernel-image-g4-smp  and it froze right after loading 

There is no such thing as a g4-smp kernel. There is the powerpc-smp
kernel, which you should use, and the g5-smp one, which you should not
use, as obviously you have no g5 system.

> the initrd. I then tried kernel-image-powerpc-smp which works great. I'm 
> wondering what is the difference between the two kernel-images and why does 
> the G4 image not work for me? Also what are the advantages gained by running 
> a g3 or g4 kernel as opposed to vanilla powerpc?

There is some confusion here, there are currently only 4 kernel images,
in both normal and smp flavor, powerpc for all powerpc processors from
early 601 to the latest g4, power3 for the ibm power3 boxes, and
power4/g5 for the power4/ppc970 processors on ibm/apple g5 boxes.

Friendly,

Sven Luther
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> 



Reply to: