LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
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 05-21-2016, 03:04 PM   #1
anscal
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Apr 2011
Distribution: Slackware, RHEL
Posts: 25

Rep: Reputation: 11
"a/kernel-generic-4.4.11-i586-1.txz" --> 486 support dropped at last?


Hi,

the uniprocessor kernel in -current is labeled "i586", so 80486 support is gone, I presume.

(Just curiosity, even if I still own a 486 PC from the 90s and also the 386DX on which I first installed Slackware...)

EDIT: Sorry for jumping to conclusions, many packages in -current are still compiled for 486. I guess only support for precompiled 486 kernels is gone? Or is it still a premature conclusion?

Last edited by anscal; 05-21-2016 at 03:26 PM.
 
Old 05-21-2016, 04:45 PM   #2
bassmadrigal
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: West Jordan, UT, USA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 6,082

Rep: Reputation: 3754Reputation: 3754Reputation: 3754Reputation: 3754Reputation: 3754Reputation: 3754Reputation: 3754Reputation: 3754Reputation: 3754Reputation: 3754Reputation: 3754
I think as updates occur, they're just recompiling the packages as i586. Since July 2015, there's only been 2 programs that have had updates and remained as i486 (mkinitrd and sysvinit). The kernel first switched from i486 to i586 in Aug 2015 with the 4.1.6 kernel.

Maybe in the next Slackware version (15.0?) Pat will finish moving everything to i586.
 
Old 05-21-2016, 06:55 PM   #3
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 2,220

Rep: Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548
I'm the first to admit being a late adopter... but surely 32 bit computers have gone the way of the cassette tape by now?
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-21-2016, 07:27 PM   #4
hitest
Guru
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 5,822

Rep: Reputation: 1980Reputation: 1980Reputation: 1980Reputation: 1980Reputation: 1980Reputation: 1980Reputation: 1980Reputation: 1980Reputation: 1980Reputation: 1980Reputation: 1980
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkelsen View Post
I'm the first to admit being a late adopter... but surely 32 bit computers have gone the way of the cassette tape by now?
I recycled my last 32 bit unit a while ago. 64 bit all the way.
 
Old 05-22-2016, 12:03 AM   #5
TarFile
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 316

Rep: Reputation: 30
Gee I just recycled about 10 386 and 486 boxes about a 3 months ago. I had not used them for quite some time

I still have 5 working 32 bit boxes but I only use one on a regular basis Two of the others get turned on occasionally to play certain networked games but they are isolated and run that other OS

I think in some places getting a nice shiny 64bit multicore box is still a stretch.

Besides they are fun to play with on occasion

I got to quit keeping the old boxes when I build a new one

I keep getting the urge to build a new one for 14.2 must resist.
(Resistance is futile)
 
Old 05-22-2016, 02:51 AM   #6
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 6,449
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020
It could be how well older systems remain supported. I do know there was a list of older hardware that was removed from the kernel due to lack of support and probable usage factors since the hardware was so ancient.

It's just the nature of the compiler too. AFAIK, GCC is now 586 due to several factors.
 
Old 05-22-2016, 10:46 AM   #7
anscal
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Apr 2011
Distribution: Slackware, RHEL
Posts: 25

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkelsen View Post
I'm the first to admit being a late adopter... but surely 32 bit computers have gone the way of the cassette tape by now?
They haven't, since they include e.g. P4, Athlon, first generation Atom, which are still capable CPUs... pre-i586 machines are only a subset of the class of 32bit computers (a subset which is indeed quite inadequate for today's needs).

Last edited by anscal; 05-22-2016 at 10:51 AM.
 
Old 05-22-2016, 11:42 AM   #8
cwizardone
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2007
Distribution: Slackware64-current with "True Multilib" & Xfce.
Posts: 4,773
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 2152Reputation: 2152Reputation: 2152Reputation: 2152Reputation: 2152Reputation: 2152Reputation: 2152Reputation: 2152Reputation: 2152Reputation: 2152Reputation: 2152
Some versions of the P4s and Athlons are 64-bit chips.
 
Old 05-22-2016, 12:13 PM   #9
Skaendo
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2014
Location: West Texas, USA
Distribution: Slackware64-14.2
Posts: 899

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwizardone View Post
Some versions of the P4s and Athlons are 64-bit chips.
I literally just bought a AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-22-2016, 12:58 PM   #10
Timothy Miller
Moderator
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Arizona, USA
Distribution: Debian, KDE Neon, Arch, Fedora
Posts: 3,043

Rep: Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by anscal View Post
They haven't, since they include e.g. P4, Athlon, first generation Atom, which are still capable CPUs... pre-i586 machines are only a subset of the class of 32bit computers (a subset which is indeed quite inadequate for today's needs).
Even 586 chips are, for the most part, inadequate. The last 586 from a major manufacturer was the Pentium-II/AMD K-5. The Pentium-III introduced the 686 architecture and the K-6 used the 686 instructions as well. So even 586 is, for the most part, inadequate for most usage nowadays, and realistically could go to 686.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-22-2016, 05:51 PM   #11
anscal
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Apr 2011
Distribution: Slackware, RHEL
Posts: 25

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 11
A correction: Pentium II (late 90s), and before it the Pentium Pro, were already i686.

The original Pentium and Pentium MMX were i586. Some mainboards for Pentium MMX could support 128MB and more of RAM.
 
Old 05-23-2016, 09:43 AM   #12
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 6,449
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020Reputation: 2020
The 80486 had no real name scheme. If anything coding and building for i486 only serves as a baseline for optimization purposes to try and ensure maximum compatibility.

Last edited by ReaperX7; 05-23-2016 at 09:45 AM.
 
Old 05-23-2016, 11:17 AM   #13
enine
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Slackware 14.2, SlackwareArm-current
Posts: 1,217
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 183Reputation: 183
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkelsen View Post
I'm the first to admit being a late adopter... but surely 32 bit computers have gone the way of the cassette tape by now?
This was discussed before

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ow-4175448543/

I have a couple old laptops which can run x64 but can only accept 2G of ram so when I tried x64 they ran for a while then started using swap so I had to go back to 32 bit.

Post #133 is particularly interesting

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ml#post4891796

Last edited by enine; 05-23-2016 at 11:19 AM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-23-2016, 01:01 PM   #14
Timothy Miller
Moderator
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Arizona, USA
Distribution: Debian, KDE Neon, Arch, Fedora
Posts: 3,043

Rep: Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923Reputation: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by anscal View Post
A correction: Pentium II (late 90s), and before it the Pentium Pro, were already i686.

The original Pentium and Pentium MMX were i586. Some mainboards for Pentium MMX could support 128MB and more of RAM.
I'm becoming quite forgetful in my old age. I should have remembered that.
 
Old 05-24-2016, 06:13 AM   #15
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 2,220

Rep: Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548
Quote:
Originally Posted by enine View Post
Post #133 is particularly interesting
... And 3.25 years old...
 
  


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
why the sound of "huge" kenerl is better that the "generic" kernel ? sdrkyj Slackware 2 02-06-2014 10:44 AM
[SOLVED] Slackware 14.0 with generic kernel results in "LZMA data is corrupt" atelszewski Slackware 5 01-02-2013 01:46 PM
Ubuntu 10.04 - missing "Build" directory for current kernel | 2.6.32-38-generic | floorripper Linux - Newbie 2 02-18-2012 06:27 AM
Confused about "generic" vs. "386" linux kernel SaintDanBert Linux - Software 6 09-29-2009 11:51 PM
Nvdia 3D support with "MandrakeLinux-20031217-i586.iso" frtu Mandriva 1 12-28-2003 06:55 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:44 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