LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 05-07-2009, 04:21 PM   #16
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,282

Rep: Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shingoshi View Post
I was looking for the location of the configuration option....
But as I stated, and was later substantiated by the respondent (bgeddy) below you, the configuration doesn't show up when you're running a 64-bit kernel. A 64-bit kernel already has this enabled by default. So you're not going to see this configuration option, no matter how hard you look.

I'm going to try with another kernel source I have on my system, and remove the .config file. Hopefully, that will give me a new blank configuration without any ARCH previously set.

And by the way, I have built numerous kernels, including 64-bit. But you simply can't configure what doesn't show up!

Shingoshi
I was not actually replying to your post, but, rather I was adding a general post to the thread about compiling a kernel for other users. I thought Eric's guide was a useful thing to mention.
I usually quote a post if I reply to it. I can understand your confusion with my reply. Sorry for the confusion. As a Gentoo user I know you are proficient with compiling a kernel. No disrespect was intended with my post.
 
Old 05-07-2009, 04:32 PM   #17
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34
Hitest,
Your apology is deeply appreciated. And may you keep firing on all cylinders (pun for "hitest" petrol).

Thank you!
Shingoshi
 
Old 05-07-2009, 04:36 PM   #18
joutlancpa
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Orlando, FL
Distribution: Scientific Linux 6 x64
Posts: 211
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitest View Post
I was not actually replying to your post, but, rather I was adding a general post to the thread about compiling a kernel for other users. I thought Eric's guide was a useful thing to mention.
I usually quote a post if I reply to it. I can understand your confusion with my reply. Sorry for the confusion. As a Gentoo user I know you are proficient with compiling a kernel. No disrespect was intended with my post.
Hell, I can't even get Gentoo installed! (well, that was a few years ago...spooked me so bad I haven't been back) LOL

Last edited by joutlancpa; 05-07-2009 at 04:59 PM.
 
Old 05-07-2009, 04:57 PM   #19
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,282

Rep: Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shingoshi View Post
Hitest,
Your apology is deeply appreciated. And may you keep firing on all cylinders (pun for "hitest" petrol).

Thank you!
Shingoshi
You are welcome, Shingoshi!
 
Old 05-07-2009, 05:17 PM   #20
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34
I will be the first to admit it...

Quote:
Originally Posted by joutlancpa View Post
Hell, I can't even get Gentoo installed! (well, that was a few years ago...spooked me so bad I haven't been back) LOL
Gentoo is NOT for the faint of heart. I've heard so many Slackware users complain about trying to use Gentoo, that it's almost pathetic. And many of them have been long time experienced Linux users. I'm one of those more adventurous types. If I see a mountain (figuratively speaking, mind you), I'm the first who wants to climb it. I've done so many of the things that users are NOT supposed to do, that it's become an obsession with me.

One of those things was to use slapt-get to directly upgrade from Slackware to Slamd64. Even Fred (the Slamd64 creator) thought I was insane. But it worked. I did have some problems, simply because of the many programs which I had compiled myself, and hadn't yet upgraded. But for package building, I use src2pkg, which is excellent. As with Tukaani's tukbuild previously, I've also done a lot of testing for src2pkg for 64-bit builds. And I'm still actively engaged in that.

In fact, it's because of my use of src2pkg on my 32-bit system using a 64-bit kernel, that I was aware of linux32. I had to build my own copy of it, since the one from Slamd64 is a 64-bit binary and was of no use to me. I have a very large config file for src2pkg.conf. And because I have to use linux32 for just about everything that I do, I knew it might work in this case as well.

Gnashley (the creator of src2pkg: http://www.linuxquestions.org/user/gnashley-88281/) had been pestering me for some time just to go back and use a 32-bit kernel. And I finally (though reluctantly) conceded. Once I have my new kernel installed and running, hopefully all of my previous problems with not being able to run some 32-bit apps will be over. Although, the compulsive-obsessive in me will still feel like I've submitted to failure.

Shingoshi

I used Gentoo inside a chroot on Slamd64. I wanted to examine building Slackware packages with their automated build system. It really is the gold mine for obsessive builders like me.

I may still go ahead and recompile gcc to allow 64-bit builds. Because all I really want to do is create kernel modules, which I can't do with the default Slackware gcc. But that's another topic which you can find here on Linuxquestions.

Last edited by Shingoshi; 05-07-2009 at 05:37 PM.
 
Old 05-09-2009, 10:16 PM   #21
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34
Is there something NOT HUGE about HUGEMEM64 on an smp kernel?

Is there something NOT HUGE about HIGHMEM64 on an smp kernel?

I mean maybe someone can explain this to me. Why isn't HIGHMEM64 enabled by default on the kernel-huge-smp? The very name of the kernel is HUGE. So why isn't it built for systems that require the maximum amount of resources available? Why are we being forced to create a kernel with a major option not provided by default. Almost anyone who has a new processor and motherboard, will have the option of using memory in amounts larger than 4GBs. I mean, for crying out loud. Windows is hamstrung to 4GBs. Is the kernel-huge only supposed to be a clone of the Windows limitation?

With the new Intel i7 motherboards, no one is going to be content for long with the limitation of 4GBs. Those boards use a minimum of 6GBs, and a maximum of 72GBs (using 4GB modules). Even on an old socket-775 board, using the Intel ich10r northbridge chip, the maximum amount of available memory is 16GBs. So am I the only one who has thought about this?

Shingoshi

Last edited by Shingoshi; 05-09-2009 at 10:19 PM.
 
Old 05-09-2009, 10:52 PM   #22
mRgOBLIN
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Jun 2002
Location: New Zealand
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 999

Rep: Reputation: 227Reputation: 227Reputation: 227
It's called HUGE because it's built with everything (Kitchen sink and all) included and is not a reference to the amount of addressable memory.

It's not a conspiracy... honest
 
Old 05-09-2009, 11:35 PM   #23
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34
I made no mention or implication of conspiracy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mRgOBLIN View Post
It's called HUGE because it's built with everything (Kitchen sink and all) included and is not a reference to the amount of addressable memory.

It's not a conspiracy... honest
I was asking about the apparent lack of consistency (not conspiracy) here. If it's called HUGE for the sake of "everything in it", that level of completeness should also include (by implication) the amount of memory that can be used. And what may have been good in the past, isn't going to satisfy the concerns I've raised about our current (Intel i7 et. al.) state technology. It is simply no longer adequate to NOT provide compiled kernels with the maximum amount of memory available. Conspiracy or not!

Shingoshi
ps. The HIGHMEM option is likely going to have to be raised to match the new systems (with more than 64GBs) that can run 32-bit Linux.

Last edited by Shingoshi; 05-09-2009 at 11:37 PM.
 
Old 05-10-2009, 07:40 AM   #24
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,393

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shingoshi View Post
I was asking about the apparent lack of consistency (not conspiracy) here. If it's called HUGE for the sake of "everything in it", that level of completeness should also include (by implication) the amount of memory that can be used.
Once again, do not confuse the name "huge" in this kernel with the addressable memory. It is huge because it contains as much drivers as possible to allow installation on a variety of hardware.

It's explained like this in CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT:

Code:
The huge kernels are primarily intended as "installer" and
"emergency" kernels in case you forget to make an initrd.
And the Slackware-HOWTO states:

Code:
The "huge" kernels support as much of the boot hardware as
possible, including several hardware RAID controllers, Fiber Channel
controllers, software RAID in linear and RAID 0 through 6 and RAID 10,
LVM (Logical Volume Manager), and kernel support required to have fully
encrypted systems.
It's somewhat unlikely that you will ever need more than 4GB of RAM to install Slackware.

Eric
 
Old 05-10-2009, 07:55 PM   #25
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34
While it may true that the kernel-huge was intended as an installation kernel, I have never run anything else. I prefer knowing that there is nothing that I could install on my system, that I won't have the appropriate drivers for. It's just my preference. So, expecting users to recompile a kernel, designates Slackware as a do-it-yourself distribution.

Shingoshi
 
Old 05-10-2009, 09:15 PM   #26
niels.horn
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
Distribution: Slackware64-current
Posts: 1,004

Rep: Reputation: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shingoshi View Post
So, expecting users to recompile a kernel, designates Slackware as a do-it-yourself distribution.
That's exactly what attracts me to Slackware: decisions are not made for me. With Slackware I am stimulated to make my own decisions - I am in control.

I prefer a hundred times a 'do-it-yourself' distribution over a 'we-do-everything-for-you' distribution.

Slackware doesn't "expect" or require users to compile their own kernel, but gives them all the tools & sources necessary to do it *if they choose to do so*.
 
Old 05-11-2009, 09:13 AM   #27
rworkman
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Tuscaloosa, Alabama (USA)
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,971

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shingoshi View Post
While it may true that the kernel-huge was intended as an installation kernel, I have never run anything else. I prefer knowing that there is nothing that I could install on my system, that I won't have the appropriate drivers for. It's just my preference. So, expecting users to recompile a kernel
Where do you see that expectation documented?

Quote:
designates Slackware as a do-it-yourself distribution.
And?
 
Old 05-11-2009, 09:25 AM   #28
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,140
Blog Entries: 52

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by niels.horn View Post
I prefer a hundred times a 'do-it-yourself' distribution over a 'we-do-everything-for-you' distribution.
I like to have both, Slackware for the "do-it-yourself", and Ubuntu for "I-could-do-it-myself, but you-can-do-it-for-me-because-I'm-a-lazy-****-at-times"
 
Old 05-11-2009, 04:31 PM   #29
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34
You really mean that I'm not allowed to whine!! ;-)

Ok guys! Admittedly, I'm whining! I've already installed and am running a 64-bit kernel. It really confuses the hell out of your system. But the thing that really gets me is that I can't build 64-bit kernel modules. The rest of the stuff (odd issues here and there) I've learned to deal with. So I finally decided to go back and try to build a 32-bit kernel with HIGHMEM64. But for some weird reason, I'm having difficulty trying to build a 32-bit kernel.

First of all, I had to use "linux32 make menuconfig" just to get the HIGHMEM option to show up. The 64-bit kernel was telling the build, "hey, we're building a 64-bit kernel, 32-bit options don't apply here. That alone was annoying until I figured out what was happening. I kept thinking I must be missing something here. I wasn't. It just doesn't show up!

I may have to resort to building a kernel on another box which is running a 32-bit kernel, and see if it succeeds there. It really shouldn't be a problem. But that's the annoying part. If I didn't have another box to build a HIGHMEM64 kernel, I'd likely not be able to do it. So if the stock kernel came built with HIGHMEM64, I would have never experienced any of this. I think sometimes there simply are things that you can't do. Or the difficulty discourages anyone from trying. I didn't write any of this because I hadn't tried. Believe, I tried, all sorts of options and routes to get this done. If all else fails, I'll try installing a 32-bit kernel on this box, and then build the new kernel. Because I really like having my full 8GBs of ram. It's really sweet for mounting /tmp on tmpfs, and building packages there. It's just FAST!!

Shingoshi
 
Old 05-11-2009, 05:15 PM   #30
joutlancpa
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Orlando, FL
Distribution: Scientific Linux 6 x64
Posts: 211
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianL View Post
I like to have both, Slackware for the "do-it-yourself", and Ubuntu for "I-could-do-it-myself, but you-can-do-it-for-me-because-I'm-a-lazy-****-at-times"
Precisely mate. Man, 10 minutes in Ubuntu and I'm bored to death...just, well.....lost for words.....lol
 
  


Reply

Tags
build, kernel, slackware


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Install custom kernel for Slackware during 1st installation deggial Slackware 5 04-15-2007 06:17 AM
How to build MPPE support into custom linux kernel reddyl Suse/Novell 2 01-20-2006 09:38 AM
How to build a module for my kernel? PCMCIA wireless support for cwc854 viktoranagy MEPIS 1 09-09-2005 10:16 AM
HowTo build a new PXES kernel to support a new NIC? ab2000 Linux - Newbie 1 07-23-2005 01:23 PM
build kernel with LVM support raggmopp Linux - Software 0 06-20-2003 05:25 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:37 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration