In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kris Kennaway writes:
: Well, these are both 686-class machines so it doesn't strictly apply
: to what we were talking about.
The build machine is a 686, but the targets are {486,586 and 686}.
The laptop is a 586...
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROT
On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 11:58:50PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wes Peters writes:
> : Peter Jeremy wrote:
> : > [1] I don't think there's a lot of `build once, install on lots of
> : > different hardware', though I could be wrong.
> :
> : Most certainly wrong fo
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wes Peters writes:
: Peter Jeremy wrote:
: > [1] I don't think there's a lot of `build once, install on lots of
: > different hardware', though I could be wrong.
:
: Most certainly wrong for those using FreeBSD for embedded devices. I,
: for instance, build on
Peter Jeremy wrote:
>
> [1] I don't think there's a lot of `build once, install on lots of
> different hardware', though I could be wrong.
Most certainly wrong for those using FreeBSD for embedded devices. I,
for instance, build on nice, fast Athlons, then install in devices
ranging from
Jim Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>I do plenty of build once and run on multiple machines. My biggest
>machine is a PII 40MHZ where I compile the world and kernels for a 486
>laptop and P-60 Router/Firewall. I would not really want to compile the
>world on these slower machines over nfs.
I do plenty of build once and run on multiple machines. My biggest machine is a
PII 40MHZ where I compile the world and kernels for a 486 laptop and P-60
Router/Firewall. I would not really want to compile the world on these slower
machines over nfs.
For my case, I guess I could rebuild only th
On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 03:57:57PM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> I'm sure something similar would be possible with FreeBSD, but I don't
> have the expertise to actually implement it. I'm less certain how
> much of a win this would be in the general scheme of things: Apart
> from special cases (li
On 2001-Feb-11 13:02:43 -0800, Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>* Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010211 12:52] wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 12:47:07PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>> > Is it possible to have multiple ASM cores and use the appropriate
>> > routines? Or must
On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 12:28:02PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> Updated patch now available at the same location. Changes:
>
> * Document the MACHINE_CPU types which are currently used
Actually, it occurs to me that this will be useful for ports as
well. Currently some of them have nonstandard
On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 01:02:43PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> * Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010211 12:52] wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 12:47:07PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >
> > > Looks awesome, someone complained that Linux was able to maintain
> > > an order of magnitu
* Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010211 12:52] wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 12:47:07PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> > Looks awesome, someone complained that Linux was able to maintain
> > an order of magnitude more SSL connections than FreeBSD, since you
> > say this gives us a 3-5x
On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 12:47:07PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> Looks awesome, someone complained that Linux was able to maintain
> an order of magnitude more SSL connections than FreeBSD, since you
> say this gives us a 3-5x speed up, I'd really like to see it committed
> and ported to -stab
* Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010211 12:32] wrote:
> Updated patch now available at the same location. Changes:
>
> * Document the MACHINE_CPU types which are currently used
>
> * Make NOPERL mutually exclusive with OpenSSL ASM and document it
>
> * Teach make(1) about MACHINE_CPU and pr
Updated patch now available at the same location. Changes:
* Document the MACHINE_CPU types which are currently used
* Make NOPERL mutually exclusive with OpenSSL ASM and document it
* Teach make(1) about MACHINE_CPU and provide sensible defaults for
i386 and alpha.
http://www.freebsd.org/~k
Okay, I've finally come up with a patch that enables the OpenSSL asm
code in a way which is generically controllable and extends to other
code which may want to enable CPU-specific optimizations (e.g. libgmp).
The patch is at
http://www.freebsd.org/~kris/openssl-asm.patch
It's based on a patc
15 matches
Mail list logo
