is it possible to make a 2.2x kernel 64 bit

zbenjudah · 06-21-2006, 11:26 PM

I hve this bit of a problem you see I jusst got a ubuntu brezy cd says its 64 bit. seeing as they gave it
free and I only have 56k conection and no money to buy a distro right now I tried the next best thing so i had to do a remaster of ubuntu to get a simple console installation with the tool chain. made an image but just can not get it to boot it just does not
work anyway question number

1 how can u tell if a kernel is 64 bit or
32 bit or what ever
2 is it posible to recompile a kernel that is
32 bit to 64 bit like say a 2.2 or 2.4 kernel

Most of the newer kernels are very larg i need somthing much leaner have been to kernel org but have found nothing

anyway thanks in advance

cs-cam · 06-22-2006, 01:11 AM

The new kernel isn't that big, just don't compile in stuff you don't need. I never used to use modules, all built-in as I thought it would be quicker and my kernels were generally around 1-1.1MB. That's not very big, on an embedded system you could get that much lower and even by using something like ulibc instead of glibc would reduce filesize.

elluva · 06-22-2006, 02:44 AM

Why would you need a small kernel? The 2.4 isn't that much smaller than 2.6, for your own sake, drop the idea of using something pre-2.6 if you don't actually need it.

Tinkster · 06-22-2006, 04:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zbenjudah

I hve this bit of a problem you see I jusst got a ubuntu brezy cd says its 64 bit. seeing as they gave it
free and I only have 56k conection and no money to buy a distro right now I tried the next best thing so i had to do a remaster of ubuntu to get a simple console installation with the tool chain. made an image but just can not get it to boot it just does not
work anyway question number

1 how can u tell if a kernel is 64 bit or
32 bit or what ever
2 is it posible to recompile a kernel that is
32 bit to 64 bit like say a 2.2 or 2.4 kernel

Most of the newer kernels are very larg i need somthing much leaner have been to kernel org but have found nothing

anyway thanks in advance

If the CPU in question is a recent Intel (or AMD) I'd say
yes, but. ...! :}

You can probably make a 64-bit 2.2 kernel, but it will not have
any support for your chipsets or your CPU.... so, what's the point?

Cheers,
Tink

zbenjudah · 06-23-2006, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elluva

Why would you need a small kernel? The 2.4 isn't that much smaller than 2.6, for your own sake, drop the idea of using something pre-2.6 if you don't actually need it.

well I dont mind but I am haveing a lot of trouble cross compileing the kernel mabey its just i dont know how to program. but I have downloaded kernel source as much as 40 mb with my 56k takes a long time. just looking for a smaller way to go and also get 64 bit with a tool chain gcc ld gdb and the like

also Iam not crazy about the idea of haveing to download or buy another whole ditrobution just to get it I tried ubuntu
and was very disapionted so.............

zbenjudah · 06-23-2006, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cs-cam

The new kernel isn't that big, just don't compile in stuff you don't need. I never used to use modules, all built-in as I thought it would be quicker and my kernels were generally around 1-1.1MB. That's not very big, on an embedded system you could get that much lower and even by using something like ulibc instead of glibc would reduce filesize.

where do I get ulibc i have tried uclibc and could not get it to compile cant remember what I used it for?
also where can i find that kind of kernel source tree and what version of gcc compiles it I have a very old tool chain that I use gcc 2.7.2 I can put my ubuntu on but the installation takes an hour and I just want a faster way