On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 09:53:02AM -0700, perdurabo wrote:
> > Panther on a G5 does run a 64 bit kernel, however it is important to note
> > that the same Panther runs on the 32 bit G4 and the 64 bit G5.  In other
> > words, most of the OS is NOT 64 bit code.
> 
> So I wonder if this means that a "default" OS X install on a G5 is
> different form that of a G4 (eg. xnu is a "different" kernel in each
> case?). I guess it's a "wait and see" thing. I wonder what further
> optimizations can be done via a kernel recompile. Can't wait to get
> some time to start hacking on the Darwin kernel again. It was a blast
> fixing that stupid clamshell problem a couple years back.

Indeed xnu is diferent on s G5.  I do not know if it is different between
G4 and G3 systems though.


> > Apple's done this before--when they introduced the PowerPC in the first
> > place, it ran a PowerPC kernel and mostly m68k OS in emulation mode.  It
> > then happened that over the next few years, Apple introduced more
> > PowerPC-only components and began shipping things that you'd notice
> > running slowly as diskspace-hogging fat binaries which had both native
> > PowerPC and m68k code in them.
> 
> Yeah, I fully remember this. But they really did the best they could,
> despite certain machines being virtually unusable. I remember the PPC
> 601 machines being virtually useless until they mostly got rid of the
> legacy 68k stuff, as it was too slow for proper 68k emulation and most
> folks opted instead for a "faster" 040.

It's a bit different now since the PPC 970 can run 32 bit PPC code just
fine.  =)
_______________________________________________
EUGLUG mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug

Reply via email to