Needless mention of non-SMP kernels in slackware64-current/CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT ?
SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Needless mention of non-SMP kernels in slackware64-current/CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT ?
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Accidentally found in slackware64-current/CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT
Quote:
If you decide to use one of the non-SMP kernels, you will need to follow the
instructions in /extra/linux-3.2.28-nosmp-sdk/README.TXT to modify your
kernel sources for non-SMP usage. Note that this only applies if you are
using the Slackware-provided non-SMP kernel - if you build a custom kernel,
the symlinks at /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/{build,source} will point to the
correct kernel source so long as you don't (re)move it.
I think it is needless here, since AFAIK there is no non-SMP x86_64 kernels prebuilt in Slackware64 and no such directory /extra/linux-<version>-nosmp-sdk exists too. And I'm not sure if there is such hardware configurations which are both not-smp and x86_64 are widely available.
Yeah, that's because C&H is the same file in both 32 and 64 bit trees. I don't care to maintain two copies, so my nonbinding opinion is "oh well." Sorry :-)
Is it a not bad idea to unify smp/nosmp naming between 32 and 64 bit versions and use empty localversion for smp (as in 64 now) and -nosmp for nosmp? We have nosmp-sdk already. For ex.:
huge.s, hugenosmp.s,
kernel-huge-x.x.x, kernel-huge-nosmp-x.x.x_nosmp,
kernel-generic-x.x.x, kernel-generic-nosmp-x.x.x_nosmp,
kernel-modules-x.x.x, kernel-modules-nosmp-x.x.x_nosmp,
and so on...
Let's bear in mind that CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT is intended to be read by new slackers as well.
So IMHO wildwizard's advice is a sound suggestion, which would provide accurate information as well as avoid the hassle of maintaining two versions of this file.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.