LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Complete CCNA, CCNP & Red Hat Certification Training Bundle
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 08-20-2015, 03:44 PM   #16
number22
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2006
Location: Earth
Distribution: Slackware 14.1 Slackware64-current multilib
Posts: 276
Blog Entries: 6

Rep: Reputation: Disabled

Can we avoid Intel's sinkhole bug only compile software in i486 or i586? Will it help to remedy this problem?
 
Old 08-20-2015, 06:55 PM   #17
55020
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Yorks. W.R. 167397
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,114
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 1524Reputation: 1524Reputation: 1524Reputation: 1524Reputation: 1524Reputation: 1524Reputation: 1524Reputation: 1524Reputation: 1524Reputation: 1524Reputation: 1524
Quote:
Originally Posted by number22 View Post
Can we avoid Intel's sinkhole bug only compile software in i486 or i586? Will it help to remedy this problem?
No. It's etched onto the silicon.
See http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08...el_processors/
(please read all three pages, especially 'Fixes and mitigations' on page 3)
 
Old 08-20-2015, 07:01 PM   #18
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 6,399
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978
At least x86_64 has some level of sanity.
 
Old 08-20-2015, 08:17 PM   #19
NoStressHQ
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Location: Geneva - Switzerland ( Bordeaux - France / Montreal - QC - Canada)
Distribution: Slackware 14.2 - 32/64bit
Posts: 572

Rep: Reputation: 196Reputation: 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
At least x86_64 has some level of sanity.
I wish it'd be the same for your posts...
 
Old 08-21-2015, 08:22 AM   #20
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 6,399
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978
Okay are we flinging mud now like retarded idiot children or talking the possibility and viability of x86 based architecture for the future of supporting various hardware?
 
Old 08-21-2015, 10:23 AM   #21
NoStressHQ
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Location: Geneva - Switzerland ( Bordeaux - France / Montreal - QC - Canada)
Distribution: Slackware 14.2 - 32/64bit
Posts: 572

Rep: Reputation: 196Reputation: 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
Okay are we flinging mud now like retarded idiot children or talking the possibility and viability of x86 based architecture for the future of supporting various hardware?
Dunno... Depends on you, as it seems forum usage is that the OP "owns" the thread and show the direction with his questions or affirmations. You seems to always change topic for your own interest, I can't talk for you man.

Cheers.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-21-2015, 01:06 PM   #22
fatmac
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Upper Hale, Surrey/Hants Border, UK
Distribution: AntiX & Vuu-Do.
Posts: 1,905

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
The next release, will be or not will be i586? That's the question!
Please stay on the topic, thankyou.
 
Old 08-21-2015, 06:04 PM   #23
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 6,399
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978
The problem is how much of the SlackBuilds of the x86 distribution will have to be rewritten to get every package i586 compliant.

Now for the question... Are you going to do the work or is Patrick going to have to spend his time doing this and possibly delay the next release to update, check, test, etc. each newly rebuilt and updated package to the new architecture?

Do any of you guys realize the amount of work that will involve?

Plus will any of the packages get any reasonable benefit from switching to i586 other than a few compile-time optimizations?

Last edited by ReaperX7; 08-21-2015 at 06:07 PM.
 
Old 08-21-2015, 07:12 PM   #24
dugan
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,565

Rep: Reputation: 2914Reputation: 2914Reputation: 2914Reputation: 2914Reputation: 2914Reputation: 2914Reputation: 2914Reputation: 2914Reputation: 2914Reputation: 2914Reputation: 2914
glibc and xorg are i586 in -current now.

Last edited by dugan; 08-21-2015 at 07:13 PM.
 
Old 08-21-2015, 07:15 PM   #25
the3dfxdude
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Posts: 517

Rep: Reputation: 191Reputation: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
The problem is how much of the SlackBuilds of the x86 distribution will have to be rewritten to get every package i586 compliant.

Now for the question... Are you going to do the work or is Patrick going to have to spend his time doing this and possibly delay the next release to update, check, test, etc. each newly rebuilt and updated package to the new architecture?

Do any of you guys realize the amount of work that will involve?

Plus will any of the packages get any reasonable benefit from switching to i586 other than a few compile-time optimizations?
We've had discussions on the compile options before. You could also read up on i586 to understand the change.

My opinion is this change is not going the way you are thinking. My opinion is this change really is to reflect what various programs were doing already.
 
Old 08-21-2015, 07:22 PM   #26
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 6,399
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978
I'm talking the bulk of the whole tree Dugan. Everything would have to be converted to become fully i586 compliant. Personally, I don't see much of a benefit of trying to muck up everything just to satisfy a tiny niche and non-existent problem, other than trying to give Patrick more work. Besides Darth, you use your own homebrewed distribution anyways, so if you aren't using Slackware directly, why should anything be done to satisfy the whim of a user of a variant system anyways?
 
Old 08-22-2015, 03:49 PM   #27
LinuxUser42
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2010
Distribution: Lubuntu, Raspbian, Openelec, messing with others.
Posts: 142

Rep: Reputation: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatmac View Post
Most distros have been 686 for quite some time, (some also offered 486, but not many), but I would think that any machine older than a Pentium2 is dead, & most likely PII are too slow to perform anything but basic tasks.

Edit: My oldest machine is a 3GHz P4 with 1GB ram.

I would think the bigger issue then the CPU, would be the amount of memory that these old machines could have.
Heck, my father replaced his dual P2 300 old server a year or two ago, with a Raspberry PI. (faster cpu and more memory, as well as less electricity)
 
Old 08-22-2015, 07:27 PM   #28
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 6,399
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978Reputation: 1978
Most Pentium II systems do have at least AGP support which a few cards in Nouveau and ATI drivers still can use. I'm not certain, but do any Pentium Pro era motherboards have support for anything past PCI-33mhz?
 
Old 08-26-2015, 08:09 AM   #29
ecd102
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Distribution: Slackware-current
Posts: 7

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Hi,
I'm running a Slot1 Pentium 3 PC as my main server for long long time.

And I have found that cups in 32bit -current tree does not work on the server.
This is because it uses SSE2 instruction in it, so this is not i586 compliant.

As I look into the "cups.SlackBuild" file, there are no line that specifies compiler option like
SLKCFLAGS="-O2 -march=i586 -mtune=i686" when built with ARCH="i?86".
Adding the CFLAGS=-march=i586 and rebuilt the cups package solved the issue.

This means gcc in -current generates instructions out of i586 as the default behavior.

I haven't checked yet how many other packages must be rebuilt with the SLKCFLAGS, but if we go to i586, gcc's default code generation behavior also needs to be considered.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
  


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
Kernel release question .......... honeybadger General 4 01-12-2009 12:29 PM
Little question about new 12.1 release diver Slackware 4 05-03-2008 01:09 PM
i386-i586-i686-x86_64 Question Libertes Linux - General 3 09-09-2007 06:05 PM
Release question parent's_basement Debian 4 01-25-2007 09:55 AM
Mandrakelinux release 10.1 for i586 when i have an i686 nickleus Mandriva 7 02-17-2005 11:54 PM

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

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:58 PM.

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