>I thought all the kernels were SMP-enabled now, no? Didn't Debian do
>away with the distinction between SMP and non-SMP kernels? At least,
>when I look at what's available with aptitude, all the kernel images
>labelled with "-smp" are given as "for transition only."
Unless I'm mistaken the 486
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 12:50 +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
> With 4 GB of RAM, you probably don't need a swap at all. Since you have
> a duel core machine, make sure you use an smp kernel. Everything should
> work fine and you'll have a fine system that I and others can be jealous
> over.
I thought al
Land Haj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm afraid I'll encounter more stuff like this with that kernel. What
> other smp-kernel would be a good choice for my hardware?
Maybe the -k7 image will do?
HTH,
Andrei
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstei
'm afraid I'll encounter more stuff like this with that kernel. What other
smp-kernel would be a good choice for my hardware?
/landhaj
- Original Message
From: Joe Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 8:00:59 AM
Subjec
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 12:50:17PM +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
> > I've been using sid for amd64 on my production machine since before it
> > became an official debian port, but for the next few years I will have 0
> > time for fixing stuff that might break, and so I'm gonna use stable
> > instead, star
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Liam O'Toole wrote:
[snip]
>>. It seems people have blinders on today. He said he wanted to use the
>> 32-bit version and he currently uses the 64-bit version. One can't
>> downgrade a system from 64-bit to 32-bit easily. IMO, one would be
>> better
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 13:20:44 +0100
Joe Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Liam O'Toole wrote:
[...]
> > But there is another possibility you should consider. Rather than
> > reinstalling, you could change your apt sources right now, run
> > 'ap
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Liam O'Toole wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 03:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
> Land Haj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I've been using sid for amd64 on my production machine since before
>> it became an official debian port, but for the next few years I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Pobega wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 12:50:17PM +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Land Haj wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I've been using sid for amd64 on my production machine since before it
>>> becam
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 03:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
Land Haj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've been using sid for amd64 on my production machine since before
> it became an official debian port, but for the next few years I will
> have 0 time for fixing stuff that might break, and so I'm gonna use
>
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 12:50:17PM +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Land Haj wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I've been using sid for amd64 on my production machine since before it
> > became an official debian port, but for the next few years I will have 0
> > t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Land Haj wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've been using sid for amd64 on my production machine since before it
> became an official debian port, but for the next few years I will have 0
> time for fixing stuff that might break, and so I'm gonna use stable
> instead
Hi!
I've been using sid for amd64 on my production machine since before it became
an official debian port, but for the next few years I will have 0 time for
fixing stuff that might break, and so I'm gonna use stable instead, starting
with etch. Ideally I should make the move in the next few day
13 matches
Mail list logo
