Re: dpkg thinks my pentium is an i486 ?
On Mon, Mar 02, 1998 at 10:15:03AM +0100, Joost Kooij wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Feb 1998, joost witteveen wrote:
>
> > Isn't this because we want packages built on Intel systems to be the
> > same? If dpgk were to report "Pentium", and some compiler is going
> > to create real Pentium code (that doesn't run on i386), then you
> > wouldn't be able to build Intel packages on your pentium any more.
>
> Hmm, I'm confused even more now. I thought that all standard debian intel
> packages are built for i386? Some time ago, I built an i486 kernel and it
> wouldn't boot on an i386, I had to rebuild it for i386. Returning to my
> question, this would mean that a package that I build on an i586 wouldn't
> run on an i386 because it is built for i486?
Sorry, I missed the beginning of the thread, but these are the facts:
"uname -a" will report your machine type, the same as in "cat /proc/cpuinfo".
Then, when you compile, you can specify an architecture. This can be i386,
i486, i586 for intel. BUT all compiled programs by gcc will run on every
architecture. If you compile for i586, you still can run it on i386. The
only difference is the order of tha machine instructions. By default, no
i486 or i586 specific instructions will be used, it is all about
optimization. The programs may differ in speed and memory usage.
However, there is a special version of gcc available, named pgcc. This
compiles with specific i586 instructions, and the binaries are pentium only.
It is unlikely that you encounter this.
If I missed the topic of the thread, please tell. Maybe I also know the
answer of the original question ;)
Marcus
--
"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god." Debian GNU/Linux finger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.org master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de for public PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: