Re: 2.6.0-test6
I am running on a sparc64 (ok, 2 of them), but I also have a sparc 32 (yes,
SMP)
Personally, I prefer 32 bit, all marketroid blathering to the contrary. If I
had a huge database or was simulating weather/gnabgig/etc, then it'd be
worthwhile. Otherwise, the overhead of 64 bit just isn't quite worth it to
me.
Do you have a pointer to known issues with 2.4.x and/or 2.6.x?
I'm not a kernel hacker, but it might just be time to try to muddle through
and at least identify issues to those who are probably better equipped than
I to fix.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Collins" <bcollins@debian.org>
To: "Paul" <paul@techcenter3000.com>
Cc: <debian-sparc@lists.debian.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 5:48 PM
Subject: Re: 2.6.0-test6
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 04:54:07PM -0500, Paul wrote:
> > Ahh, but my goal is to have sparc32 running. I don't need 64 bt, and I'd
> > prefer not to have the overhead. I figure that sparc64 is a good place
to
> > start though. Not to mention the SS20 that I'm eventually going to have
> > running deb.
> >
> > Any tips on compiling sparc32 cleanly?
>
> I thought you were running on a sparc64. If that's so, you need to use
> egcs64 in order to compile kernels on woody, or gcc-3.3 in unstable,
> even though userspace is 32-bit.
>
> For sparc32, you will have lots of trouble getting 2.4, much less 2.6.x
> running on sparc32 at the moment. Mainly because no one has nailed down
> all the problems yet. 2.4.22 is pretty good, but still has issues on
> smp.
>
> --
> Debian - http://www.debian.org/
> Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/
> Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
> WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
Reply to: