On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 14:17:12 +0700, Sthu wrote in message
<4ce23002.d07b0e0a.6484.2...@mx.google.com>:
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Arnt:
>
> > beware that some processes grabs _every_ damned bit
> > of memory it can get
>
> Can You bring here an example f such behavior?
..try put mo
Thank You for Your time and answer, Arnt:
> beware that some processes grabs _every_ damned bit
> of memory it can get
Can You bring here an example f such behavior?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@
On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 12:58:08 +0700, Sthu wrote in message
<4ce0cbf7.d07b0e0a.2eb0.2...@mx.google.com>:
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Arnt:
>
> > ..what it needs to do, it can either do in some slick hardware,
> > or, the hard sweaty way by some software hack. Motion reads a
> > webcam
Thank You for Your time and answer, Arnt:
> ..what it needs to do, it can either do in some slick hardware,
> or, the hard sweaty way by some software hack. Motion reads a
> webcam to see if anything moves, then takes pictures and makes
> movies from them. And, heavy swapping cause disk wear.
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 18:26:22 -0500, Johan wrote in message
<87r5eoajq9@emmy.axel.nom>:
> Arnt Karlsen writes:
> >
> > ..it depends, 'top |head ' tells us another wee story: ;o)
>
> Correct me if I am mistaken.
>
> Looking at your numbers, it seems that most of the time is spent in
> userla
Arnt Karlsen writes:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:57:09 +0700, Sthu wrote in message
> <4cdd0f80.ce7c0e0a.2046.a...@mx.google.com>:
>
>> Thank You for Your time and answer, Arnt:
>>
>> > > What are the hardware specs of the machine you have? Exactly
>> > > which CPU, how much RAM, what hard di
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:57:09 +0700, Sthu wrote in message
<4cdd0f80.ce7c0e0a.2046.a...@mx.google.com>:
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Arnt:
>
> > > What are the hardware specs of the machine you have? Exactly
> > > which CPU, how much RAM, what hard disk (size and rpm), etc.
> > > Pl
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 18:41:26 -0500, Johan wrote in message
<87aalgiw61@emmy.axel.nom>:
> Sthu Deus writes:
>
> > Good day.
> >
> > Just wanted to ask, Why there is no linux-image package for i586,
> > especially w/ MMX support - but only for i486, then for i686 and up?
>
> I don't think al
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 00:38:03 +0700
Sthu Deus wrote:
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Dirk:
>
> > Not all i586-CPUs have MMX, so I'm not sure if the kernel would use
> > MMX in i586-mode (despite for runtime-mmx-detection, but this option
> > you can have without march=i586). And you are alw
Thank You for Your time and answer, Dirk:
> Not all i586-CPUs have MMX, so I'm not sure if the kernel would use
> MMX in i586-mode (despite for runtime-mmx-detection, but this option
> you can have without march=i586). And you are always free to
> a) compile a kernel with march=i586
> b) use mmx
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:49:11 +0700
Sthu Deus wrote:
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Johan:
>
> > The i486 kernel will run on an i586 box. Even if you compile the
> > kernel for i586 how much speed are you really going to get? A few
> > percent? And how much time do you spend in kernel as
Thank You for Your time and answer, Arnt:
> > What are the hardware specs of the machine you have? Exactly which
> > CPU, how much RAM, what hard disk (size and rpm), etc. Please
> > provide the following output:
> >
> > cat /proc/cpuinfo
> > lspci
> > free -m
> > dmidecode
> >
> > (If your ma
Thank You for Your time and answer, Johan:
> The i486 kernel will run on an i586 box. Even if you compile the
> kernel for i586 how much speed are you really going to get? A few
> percent? And how much time do you spend in kernel as opposed to
> userland? Maybe 3-20 percent depending on what yo
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 20:18:24 -0600, Stan wrote in message
<4cdb5270.3020...@hardwarefreak.com>:
> Sthu Deus put forth on 11/4/2010 9:08 AM:
>
> > Just wanted to ask, Why there is no linux-image package for i586,
> > especially w/ MMX support - but only for i486, then for i686 and up?
>
> What a
Sthu Deus put forth on 11/4/2010 9:08 AM:
> Just wanted to ask, Why there is no linux-image package for i586,
> especially w/ MMX support - but only for i486, then for i686 and up?
What are the hardware specs of the machine you have? Exactly which CPU,
how much RAM, what hard disk (size and rpm)
Sthu Deus writes:
> Good day.
>
> Just wanted to ask, Why there is no linux-image package for i586,
> especially w/ MMX support - but only for i486, then for i686 and up?
I don't think all that many people have i586 boxen. They were current
in the timeframe 1995 through 1997. That's over a doz
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 01:10:14 +0700, Sthu Deus wrote:
> Camaleón:
>
>> How is that? Are you saying that you cannot boot a Pentium III using
>> i686 kernel? It is designed explicitly for that architecture :-?
>
> No. I say that it is impossible to load the kernel packaged for i686 on
> Pentium CPU
Camaleón:
> How is that? Are you saying that you cannot boot a Pentium III using
> i686 kernel? It is designed explicitly for that architecture :-?
No. I say that it is impossible to load the kernel packaged for i686 on
Pentium CPU - not Pentium III CPU. You are right, - it is packaged for
the Pe
On Fri, 5 Nov 2010 07:14:18 + (UTC), Camaleón wrote in message
:
> On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 07:52:44 +0700, Sthu Deus wrote:
>
> > Thank You for Your time and answer, Camaleón:
> >
> >> No, I cannot see any i586 kernel (i686 is the right one for
> >> pentium).
> >
> > AFAIK the kernel will not
On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 07:52:44 +0700, Sthu Deus wrote:
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Camaleón:
>
>> No, I cannot see any i586 kernel (i686 is the right one for pentium).
>
> AFAIK the kernel will not work on pentium machine - as it will announce
> at boot time - no appropriate CPU.
How is
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Camaleón:
>> Will there be any gain? :-?
> I believe - as it has other technologies than i486 CPUs.
I think there's a lack of evidence that it will make
a significant difference.
Stefan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian
Thank You for Your time and answer, Camaleón:
> No, I cannot see any i586 kernel (i686 is the right one for pentium).
AFAIK the kernel will not work on pentium machine - as it will announce
at boot time - no appropriate CPU.
> And we need to thank Debian DD because at least they provide i486
>
In <4cd2eddc.52790e0a.3014.0...@mx.google.com>, Sthu Deus wrote:
>Thank You for Your time and answer, Brad:
>>Probably because, like the AMD (32 bit) builds, there was insufficient
>>benefit to warrant all the extra work (to say nothing of storage space)
>>to do it.
>
>Then. may You know why they h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sthu Deus wrote:
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Brad:
>
>> Probably because, like the AMD (32 bit) builds, there was
>> insufficient benefit to warrant all the extra work (to say nothing
>> of storage space) to do it.
>
> Then. may You know wh
On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 00:29:24 +0700, Sthu Deus wrote:
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Camaleón:
>
>> Will there be any gain? :-?
>
> I believe - as it has other technologies than i486 CPUs.
I guess i586 shares most of the i686 specs and that's the reason for the
i686 kernel: all needed fo
Thank You for Your time and answer, Brad:
>Probably because, like the AMD (32 bit) builds, there was insufficient
>benefit to warrant all the extra work (to say nothing of storage space)
>to do it.
Then. may You know why they have chosen i486 instead of i386?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian
Thank You for Your time and answer, Camaleón:
> Will there be any gain? :-?
I believe - as it has other technologies than i486 CPUs.
> Anyway, I think you can always re-compile/re-build your own kernel
> (i686) and enable MMX extensions...
It reaches recompiling every time the package is updat
Sthu Deus schreef:
Good day.
Just wanted to ask, Why there is no linux-image package for i586,
especially w/ MMX support - but only for i486, then for i686 and up?
Thank You for Your time.
please consider building your own kernel with the extensions you want.
kind regards,
steef
On Thu, 4 Nov 2010 21:08:50 +0700
Sthu Deus wrote:
Hello Sthu,
> Just wanted to ask, Why there is no linux-image package for i586,
> especially w/ MMX support - but only for i486, then for i686 and up?
Probably because, like the AMD (32 bit) builds, there was insufficient
benefit to warrant all
On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 21:08:50 +0700, Sthu Deus wrote:
> Just wanted to ask, Why there is no linux-image package for i586,
> especially w/ MMX support - but only for i486, then for i686 and up?
Will there be any gain? :-?
Anyway, I think you can always re-compile/re-build your own kernel (i686)
a
Good day.
Just wanted to ask, Why there is no linux-image package for i586,
especially w/ MMX support - but only for i486, then for i686 and up?
Thank You for Your time.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas.
31 matches
Mail list logo
