Re: Resolved - was [Re: Identifying CPU]

2013-09-02 Thread Stan Hoeppner
On 9/2/2013 6:11 PM, Joel Rees wrote: > On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> On 9/1/2013 9:44 PM, Joel Rees wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Pascal Hambourg >>> wrote: Richard Owlett a écrit : > Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> >> So I fail to see why your kn

Re: Resolved - was [Re: Identifying CPU]

2013-09-02 Thread Joel Rees
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > On 9/1/2013 9:44 PM, Joel Rees wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Pascal Hambourg >> wrote: >>> Richard Owlett a écrit : Stan Hoeppner wrote: > > So I fail to see why your knowing the "CPU bus width" is relevant to >

Re: Resolved - was [Re: Identifying CPU]

2013-09-02 Thread Richard Owlett
Stan Hoeppner wrote: On 9/1/2013 8:09 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: Stan Hoeppner wrote: On 8/31/2013 10:00 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: Especially as I explicitly emphasized wanting to know bus width. [snip] You're confusing register width with data bus width. Register width dictates which bina

Re: Resolved - was [Re: Identifying CPU]

2013-09-02 Thread Stan Hoeppner
On 9/1/2013 9:44 PM, Joel Rees wrote: > On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Pascal Hambourg > wrote: >> Richard Owlett a écrit : >>> Stan Hoeppner wrote: So I fail to see why your knowing the "CPU bus width" is relevant to anything. >>> >>> If I understand correctly some processors can

Re: Resolved - was [Re: Identifying CPU]

2013-09-01 Thread Stan Hoeppner
On 9/1/2013 8:09 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> On 8/31/2013 10:00 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: >> >>> Especially as I explicitly emphasized wanting to know bus width. >> >> I find it curious Richard that you emphasize this, given that the "CPU >> bus width" in isolation is meanin

Re: Resolved - was [Re: Identifying CPU]

2013-09-01 Thread Joel Rees
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Pascal Hambourg wrote: > Richard Owlett a écrit : >> Stan Hoeppner wrote: >>> >>> So I fail to see why your knowing the "CPU bus width" is relevant to >>> anything. >> >> If I understand correctly some processors can run 32 bit OSes but >> not any 64 bit OS. > > Thi

Re: Resolved - was [Re: Identifying CPU]

2013-09-01 Thread Pascal Hambourg
Richard Owlett a écrit : > Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> >> So I fail to see why your knowing the "CPU bus width" is relevant to >> anything. > > If I understand correctly some processors can run 32 bit OSes but > not any 64 bit OS. This has nothing to do with bus width. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Re: Resolved - was [Re: Identifying CPU]

2013-09-01 Thread Richard Owlett
Stan Hoeppner wrote: On 8/31/2013 10:00 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: Especially as I explicitly emphasized wanting to know bus width. I find it curious Richard that you emphasize this, given that the "CPU bus width" in isolation is meaningless. Every x86 CPU since the original Pentium that ship

Re: Resolved - was [Re: Identifying CPU]

2013-09-01 Thread Stan Hoeppner
On 8/31/2013 10:00 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > Especially as I explicitly emphasized wanting to know bus width. I find it curious Richard that you emphasize this, given that the "CPU bus width" in isolation is meaningless. Every x86 CPU since the original Pentium that shipped in 1993, up to the

Resolved - was [Re: Identifying CPU]

2013-08-31 Thread Richard Owlett
Richard Owlett wrote: I'll be installing Debian 7.1 on two unrelated sets of machines. I have no record of the cpu in any of the machines. Is there a utility to identify the processors, particularly bus width. All machines originally ran various 32 bit MS Windows incarnations. [snip] The best a