Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Mandrake To Support AMD's Hammer

michael posted more than 12 years ago | from the hammer-time-joke-goes-here dept.

Mandriva 165

ruiner writes "Mandrake has announced their intention to support AMD's Hammer with a 64 bit version optimized for the new CPU. Redhat is also rumored to be following Suse's lead. 'This new generation of AMD Athlon and AMD Opteron processors is extremely exciting. A version of Mandrake Linux dedicated to these powerful 64-bit processors can certainly accelerate MandrakeSoft's growing adoption in the Linux corporate market' said Jacques Le Marois, CEO of MandrakeSoft."

cancel ×

165 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

you're all fags! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792625)

get back to licking your boyfriends' assholes.

FIRST POST! (-1, Flamebait)

djcdplaya (220461) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792626)

First post. In other news, try freebsd over linux. Mandrake is good for newbies, but if you know what you're doing, go with a real unix

first post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792631)

just for fun, eh?

That's OPTERON! (1)

Axe (11122) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792634)

Or, no - That's Athlon 2. Or no.. Infinium 36..

I am confused..

What will be the Intel spin on 64-bit is better then 32? He he..

dept. (4, Funny)

El Pollo Loco (562236) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792651)

from the hammer-time-joke-goes-here dept.

Followed by a press release from AMD and mandrake saying "can't touch this!"

Re:dept. (3, Funny)

bilbobuggins (535860) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793260)

Followed by a press release from AMD and mandrake saying "can't touch this!"

you're talking about when you run an athlon without a fan right?

Can you imagine... (-1)

Patrick Bateman (175284) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792652)

... a Beowulf cluster of these?

OT: Mandrake Forum the last avenue? (2, Offtopic)

twilight30 (84644) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792653)

Right, this is definitely offtopic, but why is MandrakeForum *never* the first to reveal this kind of thing? I switched to Debian for different reasons, but it has always amazed me that the community site for Mdk users is seemingly the last to have this information.

Given that Mdk is an avowedly newbie-oriented distro, one would think that the company would have a clear interest in getting this out to its 'channels', to the party faithful, *first*.

Re:OT: Mandrake Forum the last avenue? (2, Informative)

justsomebody (525308) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792710)

"June 27th, 2002 - MandrakeSoft cooperates with AMD to support x86-64 architecture - Mandrake Linux 9.x for the upcoming 64-bit AMD Athlon and AMD Opteron processors is expected to be commercially available by the beginning of 2003."

This news are published on the main www.mandrake.com page????? You don't even have to log into channels. Also there was a rumor long time ago. But news are officialy published after signing cooperation. News != Rumors.

I hope your reasons to switch to Debian were better than this bashing.
I don't really use MDK, except on my notebook.

why is this such a big deal? (5, Insightful)

wowbagger (69688) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792655)

I'm not knocking Hammer, but why does everyone act like the Itanium and Hammer versions of Linux are the first 64 bit versions? I was running 64 bit Linux several years ago on my Multia!

Once you have GCC that will compile for the target arch, and you have the needed changes to Linux to support that arch, why is it more than bunch of builds to get a 64 bit version? Many (perhaps even most) apps are now 64 bit clean (unlike certain other criminal OS's).

Why does everyone ignore the MIPS and Alpha versions?

(and OT: When will a MIPS version of Linux with full support for the extra hardware in an Indy come out?)

Re:why is this such a big deal? (1)

quasi_steller (539538) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792699)

I don't think that the issue is "The first 64 bit Linux distro". We all know that there have already are 64 bit Linux distro's, and that they are great. The issue is that companies who have a major investmen in x86 will now have a linux option (without having to compile everything themselves).

Re:why is this such a big deal? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792720)

because by the time you could actually afford a multia, they were crap.
They were the equiv. to a TRS-80...

What's you point? Who gives a fuck about 64-bit linux, when you could run Solaris on a 64 bit processor, and actually have a scalable operating system... not some POS "UNIX Like" OS...

dude, Linux is for bitches [www.linuxisforbitches]

Re:why is this such a big deal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792839)

Dude, you are a sad little manwhore. You have no clue about Solaris, do you? It's dying and for good cause. They haven't done anything to improve that OS in over a decade.

Because MIPS and Alpha processors suck! (1)

benzapp (464105) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792743)

I think the simple answer to this question is that no one cares about MIPS or the Alpha. Both platforms are now dead. They died because they were too expensive, and didn't provide sufficient performance increases over current 32-bit processors. Hell, as far as I understand it, Only IBM latest PowerPC processor outperforms the fastest Pentium 4's and Athlon processors.

Now, 64-bit processors will be affordable for everyone but the super rich, and they will natively run all the programs used by 98% of computer users. Thats sweet.

I mean, talking about the Alpha? Who the hell uses that. That has been dead for years!! It was dead as soon as Compaq bought DEC. MIPS?? Hmm, outside of my Casio PDA and my Nintendo 64, I don't think I have ever even seen a MIPS machine. If you had said you were running an RS/6000 in your crib I would feel a little sympathy. Of course, AIX doesn't cut it for you.

Re:Because MIPS and Alpha processors suck! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792883)

> MIPS?? Hmm, outside of my Casio PDA and my
> Nintendo 64, I don't think I have ever even seen
> a MIPS machine.

Silicon Graphics, anyone? I admit that his is hardly an argument for the non-deadness of MIPS, though.

Re:Because MIPS and Alpha processors suck! (1)

benzapp (464105) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792953)

To my knowledge, SGI was the only major company to use them... and as far as I know, that tradition is over. SGI is either using sparc or powerpc processors. Further, I seem to recall thinking that the reason this was going was because the MIPS processors were no longer available.

Re:Because MIPS and Alpha processors suck! (2)

FattMattP (86246) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793081)

To my knowledge, SGI was the only major company to use them... and as far as I know, that tradition is over. SGI is either using sparc or powerpc processors. Further, I seem to recall thinking that the reason this was going was because the MIPS processors were no longer available.
SGI machines still use MIPS processors not PowerPC or SPARC processors. Up until two years ago MIPS Technologies was a subsidiary of SGI at which point they were spun off into an independent company. MIPS processors are clearly still available and many companies are using them [mips.com] .

Re:Because MIPS and Alpha processors suck! (2)

Fnord (1756) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793466)

You're right about SGI not using Sparc or PowerPC processors but SGI is attempting to depreciate the MIPS. The latest Origins can have either MIPS or Itanium modules in them, and the Itanium configuration is described by them as the "high performance" option while MIPS is for "legacy configurations".

Re:Because MIPS and Alpha processors suck! (1)

skyhawker (234308) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792918)

I mean, talking about the Alpha? Who the hell uses that. That has been dead for years!!

How about the third and fourth fastest supercomputers in the world [top500.org] ? Including the fastest in Europe [top500.org] .

Not to forget that Titanic, by far the highest grossing motion picture of all time, was rendered with the help of an AlphaPC server farm running Red Hat Linux [linuxjournal.com] . Admittedly, that was five years ago. But it was still a 64 bit OS.

I must confess my bias, because I have two Alphas faithfully running Red Hat Linux at home. So far as performance is concerned, I'll be surprised if the Intel Itanium or even the AMD Hammer chips will compare favorably to comparable Alphas on floating point performance, which is very important in many high end applications.

Of course, I could be wrong....

Re:Because MIPS and Alpha processors suck! (1)

benzapp (464105) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792966)

First of all, supercomputers are a little bit different... Having 1024 processors, no matter what the speed kicks ass. Further, I am not saying MIPS processors don't have the performance to be used at all.

I am saying that MIPS processors are no longer being used in the manufacturing of new computers, nor are Alpha processors. Further, cost is a big factor here. I personally never had the money for an SGI or Alpha based system. You are one of the fortunate few, the elite, to be so privilaged.

Good for you. But that doesn't change the fact that Alpha and MIPS processors are dead, and they were never used by the mainstream. I seem to recall reading somewhere that fewer than 10,000 Alpha systems were ever sold.

Also, The hammer and Itanium processors will far exceed the Alpha on floating point operations. I mean, if they can't beat a four year old processor, they shouldn't be in business. I believe the IBM Power4, the latest PowerPC chip is still fastest.

but thats a cool link on the supercomputers... cheers.

Re:Alpha does Titanic, Athlon does Episode II (2, Interesting)

benzapp (464105) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792974)

Also, FYI.. Athlon MP processors were used to make Episode II... not too shabby, for a 32-bit processor.

AMD Technology Used for Production in Star Wars: Episode II Attack of the Clones

SUNNYVALE, Calif., Jun 27, 2002 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- AMD (AMD) today announced its collaboration with JAK Films and Industrial Light & Magic (ILM), a division of Lucas Digital Ltd. LLC, in the production of "Star Wars: Episode II Attack of the Clones".

JAK Films used AMD Athlon(TM) MP processor-based workstations in its labs to advance the art of cinema storyboarding through digital pre-visualization. ILM used a high-performance cluster of AMD Athlon MP processor-based servers designed and manufactured by RackSaver.

"Our goal was to paint an accurate picture of what `Star Wars: Episode II Attack of the Clones' would look like long before filming was even started," said Dan Gregoire, director of the pre-visualization lab, JAK Films. "Our AMD Athlon MP processor-based systems are ideal for running the powerful software we rely upon."

"Given the challenge of producing top quality visual imagery in a compressed time frame, we really appreciate the performance boost we got with our AMD Athlon MP processor-based systems," said Michael Kiernan, Manager of Systems R&D at ILM.

"We at RackSaver, with our expertise in design and manufacturing of high-density, high-performance computing clusters, are excited to have met the critical computing demands required in the production of `Star Wars: Episode II Attack of the Clones,'" said David Driggers, CEO RackSaver.

"George Lucas is admired for the many technical advances he has contributed to the film industry. The innovative AMD technology used by ILM and JAK Films is no exception, " said Ed Ellett, vice-president of product marketing for AMD's Computation Products Group. "JAK Films pre-visualized literally every scene in `Star Wars: Episode II Attack of the Clones,' which helped Lucas translate his vision to the big screen with exceptional accuracy. ILM is widely recognized in the film industry as a standard-bearer in visual effects and digital animation."

Customers using systems based on powerful AMD Athlon MP processors can experience tremendous productivity, and fast turnaround time on a variety of graphically intensive tasks ranging from creating complex special effects sequences to manipulating video, audio content and high resolution still images.

Note: For additional information about AMD's involvement in the production of "Star Wars: Episode II Attack of the Clones" please visit: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInforma tion/ 0,,30_118_756_759^566~31514,00.html

Re:Because MIPS and Alpha processors suck! (1)

linzeal (197905) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792980)

I bought 10 indys for 1000 bucks 3 years ago. I still have 4 of them, the rest I gave to a high school a while back.

Re:Because MIPS and Alpha processors suck! (2)

cwebster (100824) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792978)

>Hell, as far as I understand it, Only IBM latest PowerPC processor outperforms the fastest Pentium 4's and Athlon processors.

that would be IBM's POWER4. PowerPC chips only went into very low ned RS/6000's (and i dont think its even used in the RS/6k line anymore) and into mac's (before they went G*).

Re:Because MIPS and Alpha processors suck! (2, Interesting)

The Axe (93018) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793151)

Uhm, the Alpha CPU still outperforms a lot of CPUs today. I don't know about the latest chips from Intel and AMD compared with the Alpha, but about a year ago there was a comparison between 64-bit chips and a few 32-bit chips, the Alpha won by a huge margin.

MIPS is still being used by SGI, and you can not tell me SGI is dead. They provide a big chunk of the workstations and renderfarms used to render special effects in movies (yes yes, I know, Linux is taking over in many place :).

If I'm not mistaken, Samsung still produces the Alpha chips.

Re:Because MIPS and Alpha processors suck! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793631)

Nobody has taken the Alpha seriously since DEC went under. Sure, it's fast, but it's also a dead end, and everyone with a brain has known it for the last 3 years.

And yeah, I'll tell you that SGI is pretty near death. They're limping along with MIPS after a failed attempt to switch to Intel. God knows what their plan is now.

Re:why is this such a big deal? (3, Insightful)

Rob Kaper (5960) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793308)

I'm not knocking Hammer, but why does everyone act like the Itanium and Hammer versions of Linux are the first 64 bit versions?

Noone does. Everybody acts like the Itanium and Hammer will be the first 64 bit versions that will get substantial market share in both server and desktop environments. Like it or not, x86 is pretty big and important, so x86-64 and i64 will be pretty big and important.

Re:why is this such a big deal? (2)

joestar (225875) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793496)

There have been Mandrakes for SPARC & Alpha but apparently the market for these machines is very limited. I can remember a Linux expo with an Internet Café full of UltraSPARC running Mandrake 7.0, that was impressing!

Anyway I think it's interesting to notice the move of Mandrake towards the corporate market. They started as a desktop distribution, and now, as they are known as a desktop distribution, they start to release products targeted to corporates (see the Mandrake Prosuite, the Single Firewall, or the very recent Advantech Firewall Plus (apparently only in Europe). I think it's an excellent strategy because as they have an "easy to use" image, it a big advantage to convince corporations to use their products.

Suse? (5, Informative)

Spyky (58290) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792656)

For those who don't know, because its very unclear from the article, Suse was the first (or at least before Mandrake) linux distro to announce Hammer support.

Check it out here [www.suse.de]

-Spyky

Exciting... (3, Funny)

javilon (99157) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792658)

Why do they allways use the word "exciting". Do they copy and paste from each other?

Re:Exciting... (1)

quasi_steller (539538) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792712)

Exciting!

Re:Exciting... (-1)

Fecal Troll Matter (445929) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792781)

Hey. You. Yeah, you. Shaddup.

Re:Exciting... (5, Funny)

JanneM (7445) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792845)

Well, what do you expect? Ninety percent of press-releases are overhyped; they only exist to make something look big and significant. You might want something like this:

"In a totally pedestrian move, Mandrake - as utterly expected - announced a totally unsurprising future port to the Hammer architecture. As everybody have realized for the past year, Linux will be running on the platform, and this of course includes all the major distributions. Spokesmen for the company added: 'of course, no end-users will see any actual results from this announcement for another year or so, when actual systems will be available'. Added the AMD spokesperson: 'As far as novelty value goes, this announcement is the equivalent of watching paint dry.' Both did add that they do get a little free press out of the announcement, making it more valuable than the paper it's printed on."

/Janne

Re:Exciting... (2)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793159)

Yeah, it's strange the way the 'press release' has mutated into something no self-respecting journalist would ever use. It used to be that the art in writing press releases was to make them sound like an interesing story, not mentioning your own company too obviously, so that lazy journalists would more or less copy the whole thing.

Even with Internet standards of journalism, I don't think any news site would take much notice of press releases like this one. So what is the intended audience?

Re:Exciting... (1)

JanneM (7445) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793235)

The point of press releases today are more often than not just another way of showing that there is activity. There is often little or no intention of actually inform anybody; instead the point is in showing "interested parties", that includes investors and shareholders, that Things Are Happening. That use unfortunately debases the use of press releases for 'real' news, of course.

Now, I'm not saying this is not interesting, or 'real' news. It might be, or might not; I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable about this aspect of the business to decide, but it the very existence of 'look at me!' press releases does debase the value of the announcement.

/Janne

64-bit Mandrake? Download it now. (1)

User 956 (568564) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792661)

You could just download it now for Itanium processors. [linux-mandrake.com]

"MandrakeSoft announces the availability of the Release Candidate of Mandrake Linux 8.1 for Intel Itanium Architecture. The Itanium 64-bit architecture is used for servers and computers which run highly demanding business applications, such as large database, ERM/CRM applications or advanced computing."

Re:64-bit Mandrake? Download it now. (1)

ReNeGaDe75 (585630) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792815)

x86-64 is different from the Itanium's IA64.

x86-64 is an extension to the regular x86 instruction set while the Itanium's instruction set is totally different.

Re:64-bit Mandrake? Download it now. (1)

User 956 (568564) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792833)

Correct, however it's still useful if you have an Itanium. (Though, if you have an Itanium, you probably know enought that you won't be running Mandrake)

redhat rumours (1)

scotfl (312954) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792674)

I'm sorry if I'm being a bit dense here, but nowhere in this message [matrixlist.com] can I find anything suggesting RedHat is going forward with x86-64.

All I see is a (good) suggestion for altering the current set of RedHat install CDs to allow for processor-specific optimisations in the kernel/system binaries. There is mention of how this would carry through into x86-64 support, but this is just a suggestion from someone outside RedHat.

Manufacture support by any chanche? (1)

GdoL (460833) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792676)

Linux is mature enough so that manufactures like those, (AMD, INTEL and other bigs) should themselfs start to buld support and not wait to the Linux boudles companies to do so. Organize teams like they have with MS to build the processor focused on the software and not the opposite.

We had so manu troubles with ATHALON and the INTEL similar to instal RH amd Mandrake that it was almost tempting to change to a less powerfull machine.

I don't understand this (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792688)

Why does Mandrkae have to crow about something that is actually being developed by Linus, Ingo and others?

I'm absolutely sure that Debian will also support AMD's Sledgehammer and so will Slackware and Redhat and SuSE.

What also bugs me is the security advisories from all these companies....it sounds like they are doing the work (for example in the case of Apache's fix, it came from Apache and all the distro's just need to have one consolidated announcement saying LINUX rather than Mandrake/SuSE/etc)

clarification (from a debian guy) (5, Insightful)

Xtifr (1323) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793187)

They're not crowing about the fact that they can compile for these systems, they're crowing about the fact that they are going to compile for these systems, and support them. Since compiling code into working binaries and supporting those binaries is what Mandrake does, I think they're justified in crowing about this. As a big AMD fan, I applaud Mandrake for this, even though I use and support Debian myself.

Slackware and Redhat and SuSE may or may not support this platform directly, I don't know. It's certainly not guaranteed. There are plenty of platforms they don't support, even though they could. It's probably going to depend on whether they think they can make enough money off of it.

And yes, Debian will almost certainly support the Hammer as soon as we get our hands on some. But then we're insane, and support everything we can. Who else still supports m68k and ARM? Who else is _adding_ support for HPPA and Super8? We do it because it's fun, not because we're trying to make money.

(As for the thing about security advisories, that's a bit off-topic, but I will say that Debian's security list is intended for Debian's users, so that they know when officially supported packages are available, and it's not our fault that bugtraq decided to subscribe to our list. Complain to bugtraq if it bothers you that much.)

Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 54 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792691)


I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Horror/Sci Fi writer Stephen King was found dead in his Maine home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to popular culture. Truly an American icon.

Re:Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 54 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792756)

is this confirmed true or not?

Re:Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 54 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792835)


Yes, try Reuters.

Re:Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 54 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793564)

Post a url, I've checked about 4 news sites and there's no articles about this. I would of thought his official website might of had an announcement about this too.

Hmm... (1, Interesting)

GreyWolf3000 (468618) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792692)

I'm going to get modded down for this, but I'll go ahead and say it anyways:

In the past, kernel development has quickly caught on to newer, more powerful processors and features...MTRR (I know what MTRR is thank you very much...), 3D Now instructions, etc. Why the need for official support? And AMD is also going along with this Palladium thing? If you ask me, there's a lot of companies grandiloquently talking up promised "corporate partnerships" that I don't see happening. I mean come on, folks, all AMD has to do is release some rudamentary specs and the kernel team can get right on it.

I'm wary of "features" that require support from the entire OS and not the kernel...

Everybody... POOOOOOOOLKA!!! (-1)

Linus Turdballs (558038) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792701)

THE TROLL POLKA (ARSCHFICKEN MIT ZIEGEN)
By Serial Troller [slashdot.org] , 2002-06-25
Is das nicht ein early post?
Ja! Das ist mein early post!
Is das nicht ein Goatse [goatse.cx] ghost?
Ja! Das ist mein Goatse [goatse.cx] ghost!
Early post, Goatse [goatse.cx] ghost,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Slashdot sucks!
Is das post at minus one?
Ja! Das ist at minus one!
Is das trolling so much fun?
Ja! Das trolling is so fun!
Minus one, trolling fun,
Early post, Goatse [goatse.cx] ghost,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Slashdot sucks!
Is das nicht ein big crapflood?
Ja! Das ist mein big crapflood!
Is it worthless Linux FUD?
Ja! Das ist mein Linux FUD!
Big crapflood, Linux FUD,
Minus one, trolling fun,
Early post, Goatse [goatse.cx] ghost,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Slashdot sucks!
Is das nicht der CowBoiKneel?
Ja! Das ist der CowBoiKneel!
Is dis nicht his manchode meal?
Ja! Das ist his manchode meal!
CowBoiKneel, manchode meal,
Big crapflood, Linux FUD,
Minus one, trolling fun,
Early post, Goatse [goatse.cx] ghost,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Slashdot sucks!
Is das nicht ein WIPO Troll?
Ja! Das ist der WIPO Troll!
Is das nicht ein Goatse [goatse.cx] hole?
Ja! Das ist der Goatse [goatse.cx] hole!
WIPO Troll, Goatse [goatse.cx] hole,
CowBoiKneel, manchode meal,
Big crapflood, Linux FUD,
Minus one, trolling fun,
Early post, Goatse [goatse.cx] ghost,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Slashdot sucks!
Is das nicht Jon Katz slave boys?
Ja! Das ist Jon Katz slave boys!
Und are they not Tacos sex toys?
Ja! They are Tacos sex toys!
Katz slave boys, Robs sex toys,
WIPO Troll, Goatse [goatse.cx] hole,
CowBoiKneel, manchode meal,
Big crapflood, Linux FUD,
Minus one, trolling fun,
Early post, Goatse [goatse.cx] ghost,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Slashdot sucks!
Is das nicht ein trolltalk thread?
Ja! Das ist ein trolltalk thread!
Is it nicht now FUCKING DEAD?
Ja! Is really FUCKING DEAD!
Trolltalk thread, FUCKING DEAD,
Katz slave boys, Robs sex toys,
WIPO Troll, Goatse [goatse.cx] hole,
CowBoiKneel, manchode meal,
Big crapflood, Linux FUD,
Minus one, trolling fun,
Early post, Goatse [goatse.cx] ghost,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Oh, du schöne,
Slashdot sucks!

____________________

Change Log:

  • Subtle changes to most verses. It sounded really gay before.
  • Removed all references to Tacos pud. May have been high at time. Will investigate further.
  • Finally think I have goat sex written correctly in German. I think. Arschficken?

© 2002 Serial Troller. Permission to reproduce this document is granted provided that you send all the bukkake porn you can find to serialtroller@hotmail.com [mailto] .

Subtle troll (1, Offtopic)

zulux (112259) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792705)

The entire reason for this post is to see how many people gripe when I mis-spell Atheleon.

Re:Subtle troll (1)

MrSloth (544065) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792731)

thats Athlon, gripe gripe gripe gripe

Re:Subtle troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792732)

Hey, jackass, you misspelt Athalon.

If you're going to "mispel" it... (1)

ScumSucker (537438) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792747)

at least do it right! Its Athalon!

Worth noting (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792709)

FreeBSD already announced report for x86-64 architecture a long time ago.

Thanks for letting us know, ass-muncher. (1)

rasactive (528598) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793079)

Wanna cookie?

Re:Thanks for letting us know, ass-muncher. (0, Offtopic)

cha0sadddddddd (323712) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793269)

regarding your .sig....lots of people use extacy that way....it's called "booty bumping" if memory serves.
(i have a little sister who goes to lots of raves and her and all her little friends do it this way)

define "support"... (1, Troll)

spoon42 (41389) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792713)

Ok, so they're going to support this new platform. That's great, but:

Does "support" mean "put out a press release and then recompile all our packages once the kernel and gcc people do all the work"?

If they're not contributing this is just a bullshit attention-grabbing publicity stunt.

Re:define "support"... (1)

justsomebody (525308) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792734)

"If they're not contributing this is just a bullshit attention-grabbing publicity stunt."??????

Isn't ability to dowload their distribution with sources freely a contribution?

Re:define "support"... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793602)

That's what it looks like to me.

finally (-1, Troll)

MrSloth (544065) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792716)

i would just like to point out that Apple has been using 128 bit processors long before the PC world caught up

Re:finally (1)

dastrike (458983) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792754)

IIRC, it is only the AltiVec unit that is 128 bit in them.

Re:finally (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792855)

There is no such thing as a widespread general purpose 128bit processor...

And SSE2 has 128bit regs as well.

Re:finally (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792755)

which does wonders for your photoshop filters

wrong on just about every account (2)

g4dget (579145) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792887)

The first 64 bit processor in widespread use on the desktop was the Alpha. It even ran Windows NT. How much more "PC world" can you get? It is still being used with Linux.

Furthermore, the G4 is not really a 64 bit processor. The biggest difference between 32 bit and true 64 bit processors is that 64 bit processors use 64 bit pointers.

Apple puts out some nice hardware and software, but they are rarely the first with anything and they don't really do much research anymore either.

Organizing binary CDs for x86 chip optimizations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792736)

- Optimizing select packages for i686 and Athlon in a NFS install

For the past 2 years, I have maintained my own NFS-based install of
RedHat. It is very easy to update, add to and re-mix an NFS-based
install in a matter of minutes, hence why I do it. More recently I have
discovered that I can rebuild RPM packages from source to be optimized
for particular architectures, drop those .i686.rpm and .athlon.rpm
packages into my NFS directory, and the Anaconda installer (after
re-running genhdlist) will choose them based on what chip is in use in
the system where RedHat is being installed. E.g., while RedHat includes
different kernels for i386, 586, 686 and Athlon, and an i686 optimized
GLibC to complement the standard i386 one, I also drop in an Athlon
optimized GLibC package as well as i686 and Athlon rebuilt SDL and
multimedia RPMs to complement the standard i386 ones (because MMX/SSE
and MMX/3DNow! optimizations make a _big_difference_ in performance for
multimedia).

- Issues with distributors x86 chip-specific packages on CD

While this works great for NFS-based installs where storage is,
virtually, limitless (based on your HD capacity), CD is not. So RedHat
often find itself in a crunch when it comes to choosing what packages to
optimize for which x86 architectures. So far, it has limited its
optimizations to the kernel, only recently adding Athlon as an option in
7.1+, and just an i686 optimized GLibC. Other distros, namely Mandrake,
come with all their packages i586 built (Pentium optimized) by default,
which means its performance is often higher than RedHat's
out-of-the-box. As all of the desktop and most server systems I have
assembled and/or installed over the past 18 months have been Athlon, I
find myself yearning for a distro that is at least partially Athlon
optimized in CD form. At the same time, I'm sure many others are
looking for an i686 optimized distro too, so this only adds to the
possible "waste" in accommodating options.

- Possible solution? Make binary CD #1 optimized for specific chips.

Although it is far from perfect, I think I have at least a "partial
solution" to my, among others', lust for x86 chip-specific optimizations
in distro binary packages. A simple solution would be to release
different binary CD #1s for each x86 optimized version. E.g., release a
i386, i586+i686 and Athlon binary CD #1 for the next major version of
RedHat. This x86 chip-specific binary CD #1 would including the
approximately 25-40% of packages that would affect system performance
the most by being specific x86 chip optimized. Those packages that are
not affected by binary optimization then would go on binary CD #2, much
like the current 2 binary CD combination we have now in RedHat 7.x. And
if the default RedHat install should bloat to requiring 3 binary CDs "as
standard" to accomodate additional packages RedHat makes "standard"
(which is very likely), this approach still only requires 1 CD change
for each x86 chip-optimization wanted. And it would most likely result
in higher performance, especially for multimedia on i686/Athlon, than
Mandrake's "everything's i586" approach.

- Addressing the x86-64 future ...

Furthermore, the introduction of x86-64 (AMD's "Hammer", possibly
Intel's "Yamhill" as well) is going to force the requirement of x86
optimized binaries for performance/addressing considerations. As if
optimizing kernels and GLibC for different x86 chips already amounts to
over 100MB of RPMs on current RedHat binary CDs, x86-64 is going to
require at least an additional 100-200MB of other core libraries to
optimized for x86-64. So this distribution approach also has the added
benefit of already addressing the issue -- in a way that could already
be well understood by RedHat users if adopted prior. Or if RedHat 8.0
is not released until x86-64 starts appearing in end-user products
(e.g., if RedHat 7.3 is the next release, which I would NOT suggest
changing the binary CD layout for being a "revision" release), just use
this approach to address the issues with properly supporting x86-64 on
the same CD as an Athlon optimized binary set.

- Distribution impact and other considerations ...

Probably the most direct impact, other than the small, additional
rebuilding time to produce the added binary CDs, is the addition of more
.iso files to RedHat's servers and mirrors. Again, I feel this is
already going to be an issue with accommodating x86-64 anyway, so why
not address it with i586+i686 and Athlon+x86-64 CD options? If RedHat
is looking to minimize the number of downloads and/or create a "default"
binary CD #1 that addresses "all systems," it could package the
"normal/default" binary CD #1 with just uniprocessor versions of the
kernel for the i386, i586, i686, Athlon and x86-64 plus i386, i686 and
x86-64 optimized GLibC. That way, it wouldn't differ from the current
binary CD approach today in any way other than the fact that the
multiprocessor and enterprise kernels wouldn't be on it. Since those
kernels are not used by 99% of systems anyway, the "default binary CD"
strategy would be, more or less, nothing different than now. But power
users, IT professionals and x86-64 adopters would have a clean, easy way
of installing and supporting Pentium, Athlon and x86-64 systems with
optimized packages "out-of-the-box."

- Reviewing the approach ...

To conclude, here is a more "visual" representation to the approach I
suggest:

Today: Tomorrow (Suggestion):

Binary CD #1 -> Binary CD #1 "Default"
Binary CD #2 -> Binary CD #2
Binary CD #3+ (if included) -> Binary CD #3+ (if included)
Doc/Src/Other CD ... -> Doc/Src/Other CD ...
NEW! Binary CD #1 "Pentium/II/III/4"
NEW! Binary CD #1 "Athlon/x86-64"

As you can see, two new Binary CD #1s are introduced.

"Today" Details ...

"Today" Binary CD #1 "Today" Binary CD #2
- i3/5/686/K7 uP/MP/Ent Kernels - kernel source, support
- i3/686 GLibC - lesser binary libraries
- common binary libraries - lesser binary programs
- common binary programs - devel libraries
- common noarch packages - lesser noarch packages

"Today" Binary CD #3+ (if incl) "Today" Doc/Src/Other CDs
- additional libs/prog/devels - as optional
- non-redistributable software

"Tomorrows" Details ...

"New" Binary CD #1 "Default" "New" Binary CD #2
- i3/5/686/K7/8 uP-ONLY Kernels - kernel source, support
- i3/686/K8 GLibC - non-opt'able libs/prog (i386)
- optimizable binary libs (i386) - lesser libs/prog (i386)
- optimizable binary prog (i386) - devel libraries
- noarch packages

"New" Binary CD #3+ (if incl) "New" Doc/Src/Other CDs
- no change from "today" - no change from "today"

Which includes these 2 new CD #1 "options" ...

Binary CD #1 "Pentium/II/III/4" Binary CD #1 "Athlon/x86-64"
- i5/686 uP/MP/Ent Kernels - K7/8 uP/MP/Ent Kernels
- i5/686 GLibC - K7/8 GLibC
- i586-opt binary libraries - K7-opt binary libraries
- i586-opt binary programs - K7-opt binary programs
- select i686-opt bins/libs - select K8-opt bins/libs

[ NOTE: i686 = P2, P3 or P4; K7 = Athlon; K8 = x86-64 ]

Mandrake (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792742)

Kicks Ass!

MandrakeSoft cooperates with AMD to support x86-64 (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792748)

To provide customers with a powerful, scalable 64-bit Linux distribution with native 32-bit compatibility-

Atadena, Paris - June 27, 2002, MandrakeSoft today announced they are cooperating with AMD to port Mandrake Linux to the forthcoming eighth-generation AMD AthlonTM and AMD OpteronTM processor-based platforms.

Delivering on its commitment to innovative development in the Linux arena, the MandrakeSoft research and development team has begun work on adapting the Mandrake Linux operating system to run optimally on the upcoming AMD processors.

AMD is collaborating with MandrakeSoft to ensure rapid porting and commercial availability of Mandrake Linux for 64-bit AMD Athlon and AMD Opteron processors. AMD Athlon and AMD Opteron processors, based on x86-64 technology, have been designed to support large, intensive workloads providing high-performance solutions for desktops, workstations and servers. The new processors can benefit customers by providing 64-bit application support, while also offering optimized, native support for 32-bit Linux applications to provide a smooth transition from a 32-bit to a 64-bit environment.

"This new generation of AMD Athlon and AMD Opteron processors is extremely exciting. A version of Mandrake Linux dedicated to these powerful 64-bit processors can certainly accelerate MandrakeSoft's growing adoption in the Linux corporate market" said Jacques Le Marois, CEO of MandrakeSoft.

"The 64-bit version of Mandrake Linux optimized for the upcoming eighth-generation AMD Athlon and AMD Opteron processors can provide enterprise customers with a powerful, reliable and easy to install and use Linux distribution", said Robert Stead, Director of European Marketing, AMD.

Mandrake Linux 9.x for the upcoming 64-bit AMD Athlon and AMD Opteron processors is expected to be commercially available by the beginning of 2003.

About Mandrake Linux

Mandrake Linux is a powerful operating system that is available for the Intel Pentium®, AMD Athlon®, and PowerPC® processors. Mandrake Linux includes many graphical administration assistants & wizards that make it intuitive and fun to use while providing all the power and robustness of other Linux systems. Hundreds of included applications make it an ideal solution for both enterprises and individual users. Mandrake Linux is seen as the most feature-rich, multi-purpose Linux operating system ever made available.

About MandrakeSoft

MandrakeSoft provides a trusted interface between users of information technology and open source developers. The company offers its enterprise, government and educational customers a set of GNU Linux and Open-Source software and related services, and user-friendly and highly competitive information technologies. In addition, MandrakeSoft offers technologists committed to open software and courseware a trusted channel to offer their services.

The company has technologists in over 20 countries, and is traded on Paris Euronext Marche Libre (Euroclear code: 4477.PA; Reuters code: MAKE.PA) and the US OTC market (stock symbol MDKFF). "Born on the Internet'' in late 1998, MandrakeSoft has established headquarters in the U.S.A., Montreal, England and France. Please visit the Web site, http://www.mandrakesoft.com for more information.

About the AMD OpteronTM Processor

The AMD Opteron processor is based on AMD's eighth-generation processor core which is planned to mark the introduction of the industry's first x86-64 technology. This technology is planned to preserve companies' investments in 32-bit applications while allowing a seamless transition to 64-bit computing as those companies require.

The AMD Opteron processor is designed to deliver high-performance server and workstation solutions for today's most demanding enterprise applications. The processor is designed to be scalable, reliable and compatible, which can result in lower total cost of ownership. Key AMD Opteron processor innovations include an integrated memory controller, which reduces memory bottlenecks, and HyperTransport(TM) technology, which increases overall performance by removing or reducing I/O bottlenecks, increasing bandwidth and reducing latency.

About AMD

AMD is a global supplier of integrated circuits for the personal and networked computer and communications markets with manufacturing facilities in the United States, Europe, Japan, and Asia. AMD, a Fortune 500 and Standard & Poor's 500 company, produces microprocessors, Flash memory devices, and support circuitry for communications and networking applications. Founded in 1969 and based in Sunnyvale, California, AMD had revenues of $3.9 billion in 2001. (NYSE: AMD - News).

NOTE: Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds. AMD, the AMD Arrow logo, AMD Athlon, AMD Opteron, and combinations thereof, and AMD-8151 are trademarks of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. HyperTransport is a trademark of the HyperTransport Technology Consortium. Mandrake and Mandrake Linux are trademarks of MandrakeSoft. All other trademarks and copyrights are owned by their respective companies.

Do we really need another layer on x86 PC arch (1)

aaron_pet (530223) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792753)

I've heard lots of bad stuff about the x86 architecture...

hacks upon hacks...

Do any of these new 64 bit processors offer a way out?

Is backward compatability with 8086, 286, 386 (sx and dx), 486(sx and dx), 586, 686 now trivial, or solved with a (long term low significance cost to benifit ratio)?
</flame>

Re:Do we really need another layer on x86 PC arch (2)

Junks Jerzey (54586) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792841)

I've heard lots of bad stuff about the x86 architecture...
hacks upon hacks...


That's overstating things. Go to Intel's site and dowload the PDF file describing the Pentium II instruction set. It's absolutely huge. There are hundreds and hundreds of instructions, and the funny thing is that only minority--maybe 30%--really matter. The rest of them are things like MMX, old instructions that are no longer relevant, and lots of peculiar special purpose instructions that are rarely used. And this is only the Pentium II, so it doesn't include all of the SIMD instructions added with the P3.

So most of the cruft comes from old stuff that was relevant at one time, and now there's no way to get rid of it. It isn't because of hacks, per se.

thanks, & please consider more thn just proces (1)

aaron_pet (530223) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793436)

I understand that compatability is good for migration...

I've heard the most bad things about BIOS and bus, and other aspects... not just the x86 processors...

When will it be worthwhile to start getting rid of the not used stuff?

Are they keeping the short word instructions doing what they did, or are they making them do more usefull stuff...

(I suppose you could have a single instruction perform multiple operations... one that is old spec and one that is new spec.

Maybe I am considering something to be a problem that isn't...
but as the instruction set increases, don't we have to have more bits to to describe the instruction?... Now I am realising that memory addressing is the big benefit for larger... bus width?

Also, how much faster are natively compiled for transmeta applications than those that go through the instruction conversion caching? (I think thats a way of putting it)

Thank you for your discourse, I am attempting to learn stuff from this conversation.
</cow>

Re:Do we really need another layer on x86 PC arch (2)

mikefoley (51521) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792861)

If people wanted a clean architecture, they would have bought Alpha's. The thing is, the vast majority don't give a rats ass about computer architectures. They only want to know one thing:

Does it run my application?

x86-64 does, without re-compiling. People can move at their own pace, when they want to move. IA-64 is making the mistake of Alpha. Few apps, high price, force people to change to get on board.

Re:Do we really need another layer on x86 PC arch (1)

ozzmosis (99513) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792870)

All of them do.

thats the whole point of new architecture.

Re:Do we really need another layer on x86 PC arch (2, Funny)

cheezedawg (413482) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793125)

Intel's Itanium is different than AMD's 64 bit processor. It is a completely new RISC architecture and Intel and HP developed together. It does not build upon the x86 "hacks". Compatibility with existing x86 code is achieved with an on-chip x86 emulation unit.

Too Many Directions? (1)

shoemakc (448730) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792816)


It always appeared to me that Nandrake/Suse was most strongly targeted at the desktop, while redhat maintained the most alignment with the server market.

A serious comitment by Mandrake/Suse to the server market my be pulling mandrake in too many directions at once.

-Chris

Liberal myth by pwpbot (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3792825)

It amazes me that so many allegedly educated people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet showing itself in neat fourweek cycles with the same side facing us all the time is ludicrous Furthermore it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent Godfearing Americans as if any further evidence was needed Daddys Roommate God AlmightyDocumentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on lawabiding Americans Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control Inc these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up Thats right neighbors the next time youre out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights the liberals will see it These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt 45 and a 38 Special And when they detect you with a firearm their computers crossreference the address to figure out your name and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about youOf course this all works fine during the day but what about at night Even the liberals cant control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor Thats where the moon comes in Powered by nuclear reactors the moon is nothing more than an enormous balloon emitting trillions of candlepower of gunrevealing light Piloted by key members of the liberal community the moon is strategically moved across the country pointing out those who dare to make use of their Godgiven rights at nightYes I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous but consider this Despite what the revisionist historians tell you there is no mention of the moon anywhere in literature or historical documents anywhere before 1950 That is when it was initially launched When President Josef Kennedy at the State of the Union address proclaimed We choose to go to the moon he may as well have said We choose to go to the weather balloon The subsequent faking of a moon landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down

-pwpbot

Great! But.....WAIT! (2, Insightful)

artsygeek (582248) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792831)

Mandrake needs to make the 64-bit version a more server-friendly design....and make it less desktop-ish....for now.... I mean, Mandrake's great in that I can get any member of my family to install linux or config their system or whatever with it, but it needs to "cut the fat" that comes with it being an all-inclusive desktop OS.....of course that's just my opinion...I could be wrong...

Re:Great! But.....WAIT! (2)

foonf (447461) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793189)

Mandrake needs to make the 64-bit version a more server-friendly design....and make it less desktop-ish

You know what, I would agree with you that mandrake in general should be less bloated. But I don't think that de-emphasizing the desktop for x86-64 is wise at all--if anything they should make it even more desktop-focused than the current x86 version. Why? Well, its very likely that some kind of Linux (along with NetBSD of course) will be the only usable operating system on the x86-64 platform when it arrives. There will be a brief window, when the hardware is available, but Windows hasn't been ported yet, that running a free *nix will be the only option for anyone who wants to use x86-64 hardware.

Of course it will be used in a lot of servers, but these people won't choose mandrake anyway (I would be surprised if any of the major distributions don't have x86-64 distributions available soon after the hardware is publicly released, as long as a good compiler is available and most common software compiles with minimal trouble). But certainly people will be drawn to this platform for high-end desktop applications also, and the very fact that there will be no full-performance native alternative will render many of the typical arguments against desktop linux moot, and offer an opportunity to draw users in who might not consider it otherwise. So I think there NEEDS to be a good desktop distribution for x86-64 available when the hardware arrives.

64 Bit... sounds powerful... (1)

Space Coyote (413320) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792923)

... So rumour has it it will start KDE in less than a minute. :) </old joke&gt.

Re:64 Bit... sounds powerful... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793041)

Wow, that's overstating it. Rumour has it over here that it can possibly start KDE in less than 2 hours.

Face it, Slashdot. X11 and everything built for it is fucking stupid.

Linux framebuffer -- w00t w00t! Fuck you X!

Re:64 Bit... sounds powerful... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793086)

Aye... but how long will it take for Emacs to boot? :)

Why are we still compiling for the 386? (4, Insightful)

frooyo (583600) | more than 12 years ago | (#3792947)

Talk about how people say MIPS and Alpha is dead (just a little trolling) - who honestly uses or knows of someone using a 386 anymore.

Why don't all distro companiesstart atleast compiling for 486 and also have at the least a distro that is compiled entirely for, say 586 (like Mandrake).

I don't understand why companies like RedHat (who make a great solid modern distro) don't make available for the more modern processors a distro optimized for it.

Why sacrafice new technology (speed) for the old and thus making the new run at the speeds of the old?

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793109)

Most modern mandrake distros are actually 686 (pentium pro) compiled.

Most of the rest are 586 to optimise for the general pentium class, and still be reasonable on 686 processors.

If you look for a 486 distro, you will actually have a hard time, as I found out when I wanted to set up my old 486 as a nice web/ftp server for work. Mandrake 7.0 did the job, after trying slackware, microlinux, etc.

I would like to see in 'instant server' distro for 386/486, though, with Apache, Samba, Perl, PHP and MySQL/Postgres and maybe just linuxconf for the rest. No X server or anything else. Would be nice.

Instant server for modern machines, with the same config, but 686 optimised, with good security defaults, etc. would be great :)

::thinks about sending off a quick mail to mandrake in that regard::

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793155)

Yeah and it pisses me the hell off too.

For all the Linux market's bitching about bloatware there's still no good reason that SuSe should require 64 MB just to install.

There's also no good reason for them to ship 686 code. Just make it an easy recompile at installation option, because the guy with the Pentium 8 and 5 gigs of RAM is going to compile a kernel a lot faster than some poor schlob with a 386.

If a distro won't install on the least of my boxen, I'm not going to put it on the best either. I may have to break this rule when the x86-64 comes out though :)

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793264)

So, you are saying that RedHat compiles the ENTIRE system for 586. I think not, it is 386 with ONLY the kernel has 686 enhancements.

I don't know of any distro other than Mandrake that compile the entire system with 586 or higher.

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (2)

treke (62626) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793567)

glibc is also compiled with processor enhancements.

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793180)

Why?

I guess so that it will run on practically every PC.

(Probably not the answer you wanted? :) )

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793329)

I guess so to too. Because you and I know how there are thousands of apache servers out there running on a 386 and all.

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793273)

I have said to myself many times over 'WTF' over this exact thing. Why doesn't RedHat and others allow a distro to be COMPLETELY compiled for the 586/686 processor.

Other than Mandrake, I don't know of any distro (and Mandrake is a piece of crap newbies shit)

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793287)

Alpha is dead

When was it alive?

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793298)

Gentoo all the way !!!!!!

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793307)

Well there are many reasons. First and formost there is very very little performace gain for most apps. If the kernel gets rebuild for your arch and some other super intensive stuff you add the system yourself gets compiles 586+ then your at maximum performace. Xfree86, your word proccessor, spreadsheet, etc just won't see much performace gain nor will most other important apps. What will happen is they will likely use more ram and the binarys will have a larger footprint on disk. They are also very likely depending on gcc versions to be considerably less stable. In general compileing for better then 386 is not gonna help enough to out weigh the costs in other areas.

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793323)

Xfree86 ... just won't see much performace gain

The X-server is massive. Now that deserves a WTF.

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793310)

Dont forgot 'Linux from Scratch' ...

[OT] Gentoo (2)

tunah (530328) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793377)

Give gentoo [gentoo.org] a try. You tell it what processor you have and it compiles and optimises every piece of software you install (including glibc, gcc, linux) for your processor.

This, and some other advantages of compiling from source, make this distro much faster than any other I've tried.

The install process is definitely not for the inexperienced, so your point about precompiled distros still applies, but once it is installed, it is very easy to administrate, and one of the first to get new security packages (I woke up after OpenSSH 3.4 was released and typed 'emerge rsync openssh' and it was installed).

Sorry to come across as yet another offtopic smug evangelising gentoo user... I guess I am :P</rant>

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (2)

joestar (225875) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793475)

I'm amazed about such ignorance. It's been _3_ years that Mandrake comes compiled for i586 and more (it comes with gcc optimizations for pentium instructions set), so you can't run a Mandrake on a i386 or a i486 machine (they released a version of Mandrake 7.0 for i486 but it seems that as the demand for these processors is very low, they abandonned it).

Re:Why are we still compiling for the 386? (1)

MarcQuadra (129430) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793511)

I wish Mandrake would produce i586, 1686+mmx, and k7+3dnow distros. It would be a lot easier than recompiling everything myself. GCC is about to have automagic use of 3Dnow! instructions (should be in 3.2, IIRC) which would boost system speeds a bunch.

if I could ask a lamer question... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793076)

..hmmm, for someone who just surfs, does xmms audio, etc, exactly how "much better" would the computing experience be switching to one of these advanced processors, with the modem remaining a static semi low speed? If you aren't a gamer or a server or do advanced graphics or scientific configuring, are they really worth it?

Honest question. I'm still on a 200 mghz machine, it seems zippy enough with a lot of ram in it for what I do mostly. I understand thast there always has to be newer and better, at one time the PPro I have was the latest and best, but is there really that a significant change in normal home casual surfing? I've used moderately faster machines at the library that are on broadband, the download pipe seems more important than the processor, or am I wrong on that? which is a better deal buck for buck, get broadband if possible, or get the latest and greatest hardware, with the caveat you can't afford *both*?

Re:if I could ask a lamer question... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793139)

Yeah the average person probably doesn't need this.

I've got a 5x86 100 and 32 MB of RAM and if I'm honest with myself it does most everything the average user really NEEDS.

Of course I've upgraded twice since then, but I still use the old 5x86 box for Dreamcast coding.

I'm pumped about the mathematical possibilities of the 64-bit chip. I'm better my CGH program will be hella impressive with the extra juice.

Eeerh.. (1)

dmouritsendk (321667) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793183)

Why sit around and wait for somebody else to compile the images for you? Use a source based disto dammit, one that grabs the source to your system and then compiles it. As other people commented before, most linux apps are allready 64bit ready. Because most needs to be compileable on MIPS/ALPHA/SPARC platforms.

GCC(and binutils) supports compiling to x86-64 , this is still experimental though. But searching/looking abit in the mailinglist archives @ x86-64.org show that stuff like qt allready are comiling fine, only needing a wee-change in the makefile(Link [x86-64.org] ).I think thats quite impressive, and im willing to bet good money that GCC has production class x86-64 support by the time the processor is actually available to buy.

So, armed with gcc and a version of Gentoo [gentoo.org] , Linux From Scratch [linuxfromscratch.org] or any other sourcebased disto that supports compiling the entire system from scratch. You will beable to create/compile your very own system, which can be WAY more optimized that anything a vendor does(i cant really see how its possible for a precompiled kernel images cant be optimized to a system).

The the only bad thing about thiese kinda of disto s is that big large packages as x/gnome/openoffice/what-ever takes for ever to compile. But on 64bit processor, who cares =)

Nope, Not Gonna Happen. (2, Insightful)

mchappee (22897) | more than 12 years ago | (#3793300)

>'A version of Mandrake Linux dedicated to these powerful
>64-bit processors can certainly accelerate MandrakeSoft's
>growing adoption in the Linux corporate market'
said
>Jacques Le Marois, CEO of MandrakeSoft.

*swat* Bad CEO! Bad, bad! AMD is not doing very well in the corporate market. PHBs just don't like it. Sure, the grunts that take care of the machines like it, but they (we) just don't have the pull when it comes to writing a check. Imagine this conversation:

Me:"Hey boss, if we went with Corp_PC-A instead of Corp_PC-B, we would save about $200 per computer!"
Boss:"Really? What's the difference between the two?"
Me:"Corp_PC-B uses an AMD processor instead of an Intel."
Boss:"Whoa, now. The processor is pretty important, right? I don't think that we want to skimp there. We better 'go long' on the processor and trim the fat on memory and disk space. Oh, and stick a Trident video card in there for good measure! Silly hacker, what do you know about corporate responsibility. Go fix me turkey pot pie!"

OK, a little creative leeway. The point is that Intel has the aura of a rock-solid performer, while AMD has a hacker/gamer hippie case-modder feel.

Besides, AMD lost it's underdog luster to me when they struck a deal with Microsoft to testify [siliconvalley.com] on their behalf for an endorsement. [infoworld.com]

Matthew
In or near St. Louis? Hire me [mattshouse.com]

I did not know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793378)

Mandrake was a supporting AMD Hammer? I thought he was working on E 17

3D-GUIs need support too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3793402)

3D-GUIs need support too.

There will soon enough be 3D-GUIs available from Microsoft and Apple. One Parhelia's next generation friends from ATI and nVidia are here the Joe Schmoe family will buy into these new whizzy dizzy 3D GUIs. Linux need a viable 3D GUI too.

Support www.3dwm.org or www.berlin-consortium.org or whatever other options there are. Their development seem to have stalled in mid-air.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?