LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Hardware
User Name
Password
Linux - Hardware This forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 09-26-2013, 04:19 PM   #31
Tecolote
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 69

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
When you want to achieve your goal with spending much more money and getting parts not easily available for no good reason that is of course up to you. I was just mentioning that you already build a machine that you try to tell us we want to sell you.

If you believe cascade9 or not is also up to you, I personally would, he is one of the most knowledgeable members regarding hardware that LQ has.
Firstly, I've no doubt of cascade9's knowledge, but I've also no doubt of his fixation on herding me into using the latest'n'greatest components, newest distro releases, and so on. I've lost count of the number of times he has tried to do so...probably about as many times as I've said the word 'legacy'. I still have hope he will set aside this agenda.

Secondly, I'm trying to choose the best/newest/most powerful components possible that will still support and run Linux kernels 2.6.29 or prior. If I need to downgrade the CPU to Phenom II x4 ,or lower, then just tell me the best CPU I can hope for. So far as I can determine, the graphics cards and motherboards will do the job. If not, tell me what will, and don't tell me I need an AGP card, as I know that is bunk. Constructive criticism is okay, but pointless criticism (and disinformation) I can live with out. More help...less hinder.

Last edited by Tecolote; 09-28-2013 at 05:36 PM.
 
Old 09-26-2013, 04:42 PM   #32
Tecolote
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 69

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascade9 View Post
'Designed specifically to run legacy software', eh?

If you want a system to run 'legacy software' then you really want hardware older than the oldest linux kernel version you plan on using.

2.4.31 is a mid 2005 release, so you want hardware older than that. Using 2008 chipset and 2010 CPU is more than likely going to run into some _major_ problems.



If you had given a decent reason for your pseudo-legacy build, maybe you would have recived a better expereince?

Suggesting using a 9XX chipset over a 8XX or 7XX does not make this a 'latest and greatest' build.

If you really want a hardware suggestion-

AMD 2500+ (or other 'barton' CPU), Abit NF7-S ver 2.0 baord. Or A Socket 939 board and a Winchester, venice or clawhammer athlon 64.
First off, the fact you decided to target the distro with the absolute oldest kernel to base your suggestions on did not escape me. But point taken...its obvious to me I cannot alter my parts-list to accommodate DSL, just as I've no doubt it's obvious to you I'm unwilling to go back to Athlon/AGP graphics card era.

So you've picked the easiest target to deconstruct, let's hear your hardware recommendations for 2.6.29.

Or maybe there is absolutely no possible "decent reason" in anyone's mind, and had I stepped on this 'land mine', the debate-addicts, latest'n'greatest zealots, and wannabe-censors would of crawled out from under their rocks en masse and swamed me? We will never know.
 
Old 09-26-2013, 04:44 PM   #33
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Germany
Distribution: Whatever fits the task best
Posts: 16,450
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512
The Phenom II X6 and the Phenom II X4 9xxT have the Turbo Core feature that will not work with kernels <2.6.34 and can even confuse the kernel so that the CPU will never run with its nominal frequency. So you are better of with a Phenom II that does not feature Turbo Core (one without the T in the name).
 
Old 09-27-2013, 07:22 AM   #34
cascade9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Brisneyland
Distribution: Debian, aptosid
Posts: 3,718

Rep: Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904
Telecolote, if you want any more help from me, then either-

Tell me what the intended use is, or
Apologise for all the 'you just want to do is push a latest and greatest build' posts.
 
Old 09-28-2013, 05:36 PM   #35
Tecolote
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 69

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
The Phenom II X6 and the Phenom II X4 9xxT have the Turbo Core feature that will not work with kernels <2.6.34 and can even confuse the kernel so that the CPU will never run with its nominal frequency. So you are better of with a Phenom II that does not feature Turbo Core (one without the T in the name).
Thanks for the info. Think maybe cascade9 already mentioned it, but it never quite registered with me (the conversion rhetoric has proven to be an effective distraction). Anyway, it looks like this means I gotta downgrade my CPU choice to Phenom II x4...can't say I like it much, as I really wanted six-core, but I'm willing to make any reasonable changes in my parts-list to accommodate kernels 2.6.28 through 2.6.11.

Unfortunately, when I decided on the Phenom II x6 1055T, I threw out all notes & printouts on the x4 CPUs, so I'm starting from scratch, and there are a lot of models to look over. I'd much appreciate knowing which one you think might work best for the kernels I'll be using. That would at least give me a 'start-point', and cut down research time. As I'm fast approaching deadline, such shortcuts are much needed.

Last edited by Tecolote; 10-01-2013 at 05:35 PM.
 
Old 09-28-2013, 06:45 PM   #36
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Germany
Distribution: Whatever fits the task best
Posts: 16,450
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512
There is no difference between the Phenom II X4 CPUs (except power consumption), so you can get anything with the T in the name (and of course the 920 and 940, which are AM2+ only).
 
Old 09-29-2013, 12:26 AM   #37
cascade9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Brisneyland
Distribution: Debian, aptosid
Posts: 3,718

Rep: Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904
Linux kernel 2.6.8 release date - 14-Aug-2004
Linux kernel 2.6.11 release date - 02-Mar-2005

AMD 770 chipset (inital) release date- 19-Nov-2007
nVidia 720d release date- Dec-2007

1st Phenom II release date- 09-Feb-2009

Using a kernel that much older than the hardware is stupid. And asking for hardware damage. Early kernels could have issues 'finding' multipule cores on AMD machines (or at all if you go far enough back), ACPI/frequency scaling might not work or if they work at all, work 'sub-optimally'........

*edit-

Quote:
Published on February 11, 2008

In our AMD Phenom 9500 review, we had detailed all of the problems we had experienced with this newest AMD platform, which mostly came down to a kernel panic when switching from an AMD Athlon 64 X2 to Phenom and stability problems once the system was up and running. With Ubuntu 8.04 Alpha 4, which utilizes the Linux 2.6.24 kernel, the experience was much more pleasant and when running this quad-core processor we no longer experienced as many stability problems.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item=998&num=1

Last edited by cascade9; 09-29-2013 at 12:39 AM.
 
Old 10-01-2013, 05:58 PM   #38
Tecolote
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 69

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascade9 View Post
Linux kernel 2.6.8 release date - 14-Aug-2004
Linux kernel 2.6.11 release date - 02-Mar-2005

AMD 770 chipset (inital) release date- 19-Nov-2007
nVidia 720d release date- Dec-2007

1st Phenom II release date- 09-Feb-2009

Using a kernel that much older than the hardware is stupid. And asking for hardware damage. Early kernels could have issues 'finding' multipule cores on AMD machines (or at all if you go far enough back), ACPI/frequency scaling might not work or if they work at all, work 'sub-optimally'........

*edit-

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item=998&num=1
My mistake-I meant kernels 2.6.28 through 2.6.11. The distractions are starting to wear down on my ADD & dyslexia, and typos are one result. When it comes to this at least, we are in agreement, and you have no need to convince me. I'm already well aware that I will obviously not be able to conform my parts-list to meet the requirements of DSL...and probably some others nearly as old. For these, it will have to be 'pot-luck'. I'll give them a go as a live CD/DVD, if that works, I'll try an install, and if that works, I'll give them a week to month test-drive.

We definitely part company with your suggestion to start with the oldest kernels first, as common sense dictates its much more likely I can alter my parts-list to accommodate kernel 2.6.28 than 2.6.11, so I'm gonna have to go the opposite route, and start with the newest kernel first. The big question to answer is starting with kernel 2.6.28, how far back can I go (towards 2.6.11), before the component changes required become unreasonable?


]
 
Old 10-01-2013, 06:05 PM   #39
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Germany
Distribution: Whatever fits the task best
Posts: 16,450
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512Reputation: 4512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tecolote View Post
We definitely part company with your suggestion to start with the oldest kernels first, as common sense dictates its much more likely I can alter my parts-list to accommodate kernel 2.6.28 than 2.6.11, so I'm gonna have to go the opposite route, and start with the newest kernel first. The big question to answer is starting with kernel 2.6.28, how far back can I go (towards 2.6.11), before the component changes required become unreasonable?
I am not quite getting why you would do it that way, maybe you can elaborate on that. Common sense also will tell you that hardware that runs with 2.6.11 will also run with 2.6.28. Common sense will also tell you that you can save yourself the time and money if you would just build a middle class machine and use virtual hardware. It would really help us to help you if you tell us why you insist of using those old kernels, old hardware and why this hardware has to be physical. What is your intended use?
 
Old 10-03-2013, 06:48 AM   #40
cascade9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Brisneyland
Distribution: Debian, aptosid
Posts: 3,718

Rep: Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904
It should be obvious, but I'll spell it out....again.....

Wnat to use a Phenom II? OK. Whats the chance of a Phenom II running well if a Phenom wont run properly? Zero. You cant go any further back than 2.6.24 and get proper suppotr, even with a Phenom, let alone a Phenom II.

If you bothered to dig through old posts and reviews, you'll find plently of information-

Quote:
ATI's SB600 with its SATA, PATA, and audio capabilities, have already been merged with the 2.6.17 kernel in its release candidate 3.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item=478&num=3

So you wont run any AMD 7XX chipset properly on kernels earlier than 2.6.17, even if you use a Athlon 64 X2 CPU....

Either give up on running ancient unsupported kernels/OS versions, or use older hardware than you are planning.
 
Old 10-03-2013, 06:09 PM   #41
Tecolote
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 69

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
There is no difference between the Phenom II X4 CPUs (except power consumption), so you can get anything with the T in the name (and of course the 920 and 940, which are AM2+ only).
Should the power consumption be important factor in deciding, or a non-issue?
 
Old 10-03-2013, 06:34 PM   #42
Tecolote
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 69

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
I am not quite getting why you would do it that way, maybe you can elaborate on that. Common sense also will tell you that hardware that runs with 2.6.11 will also run with 2.6.28. Common sense will also tell you that you can save yourself the time and money if you would just build a middle class machine and use virtual hardware. It would really help us to help you if you tell us why you insist of using those old kernels, old hardware and why this hardware has to be physical. What is your intended use?
I think cascade9 answered that question for me:
"You cant go any further back than 2.6.24", which means the range I will be trying to accommodate is 2.6.28 through 2.6.24, while the kernels 2.6.22 through 2.6.11.6 will have to take 'pot luck' with DSL.

I'm aware "that hardware that runs with 2.6.11.will also run with 2.6.28", but got no intention of going back to Athlon/AGP graphics card era, and it seems the older the kernel, the more likely this becomes necessary. According to cascade9, I would have to make unreasonable changes to my parts-list to provide hardware support for kernels prior to 2.6.24, so a lot of time has already been saved by not starting with the oldest kernel first. Its obvious to me that I'll be more likely able to make reasonable changes to accommodate the newest kernel(2.6.28.8) than the now oldest (2.6.24), and working backwards until I hit an impasse.

If I was interested it saving "time and money" and in "a middle class machine", common sense dictates I would skip the custom-build, trot on down to BestBuy/Walmart, and get a readymade junker that could easily do everything you're suggesting.

For them that still use Windows 98 & 2000, some go the VM route (but don't seem too happy with it), while most go for physical hardware...their only complaint seems to be finding the hardware. Like them, I got no interest in VM nor modern hardware, so common sense dictates I focus on what I am interested in, and not the reverse.

Last edited by Tecolote; 10-08-2013 at 09:07 PM.
 
Old 10-03-2013, 06:49 PM   #43
Tecolote
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 69

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Jeez Louise!

...that was actually quite helpful. So now that I know the range of reasonable expectations, I'll focus on modifying the parts-list to accommodate kernels 2.6.28 to 2.6.24. This is not nearly as bad as I was expecting, being as it leaves only five of the sixteen distro releases unsupportable.

On the off chance this means you've actually decided to help, I'd like to hear your recommendations to alter my parts-list to support kernel 2.6.28?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cascade9 View Post
It should be obvious, but I'll spell it out....again.....

Wnat to use a Phenom II? OK. Whats the chance of a Phenom II running well if a Phenom wont run properly? Zero. You cant go any further back than 2.6.24 and get proper suppotr, even with a Phenom, let alone a Phenom II.

If you bothered to dig through old posts and reviews, you'll find plently of information-



http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item=478&num=3

So you wont run any AMD 7XX chipset properly on kernels earlier than 2.6.17, even if you use a Athlon 64 X2 CPU....

Either give up on running ancient unsupported kernels/OS versions, or use older hardware than you are planning.
 
Old 10-04-2013, 03:00 AM   #44
cascade9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Brisneyland
Distribution: Debian, aptosid
Posts: 3,718

Rep: Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tecolote View Post
I think cascade9 answered that question for me:
"You cant go any further back than 2.6.24", which means the range I will be trying to accommodate is 2.6.28 through 2.6.24
Phenom II isn't going to run properly on 2.6.24, even if you get a non turbocore version.

2.6.29 should do it, but 2.6.30 is safer.

But are you even going to listen to that? I doubt it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tecolote View Post
On the off chance this means you've actually decided to help, I'd like to hear your recommendations to alter my parts-list to support kernel 2.6.28?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascade9 View Post
Telecolote, if you want any more help from me, then either-

Tell me what the intended use is, or
Apologise for all the 'you just want to do is push a latest and greatest build' posts.
 
Old 10-08-2013, 08:50 PM   #45
Tecolote
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 69

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Depends...

Quote:
Originally Posted by cascade9 View Post
Phenom II isn't going to run properly on 2.6.24, even if you get a non turbocore version.

2.6.29 should do it, but 2.6.30 is safer.

But are you even going to listen to that? I doubt it.
If you're stuck on me jumping to 2.6.30...then no, that ain't on the menu. If you're referring to me dropping Phenom II, I'm now looking into Phenom x4 CPUs, but still no Athlon is being considered, and I've still no intention of dropping the motherboards or graphics cards.
 
  


Reply


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
LXer: Solving Display Problems With Some NVIDIA Chipsets After Installing Slackware 13.37 or SalixOS LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 04-06-2012 05:50 AM
What problems will linux complain about when I change motherboard humble1 Linux - General 10 09-13-2008 06:59 PM
installing linux on a ATI chipsets Motherboard bijoyrajkhowa2007 Linux - Software 1 03-26-2007 05:00 PM
via KT600 chipsets on albatron KX600 Pro motherboard and agpgart daemonTED Linux - Hardware 0 01-20-2004 03:53 AM
Motherboard Integrated Chipsets qsilver Linux - General 1 06-14-2001 01:45 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:16 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
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration