On Saturday 13 September 2003 18:02, Mark Knecht wrote: > > > sed s:\-march=athlon:\-march=athlon-xp:g -i arch/i386/Makefile > > That's cool, but I won't bother. I was just curious the other day about > running a 2.4.22 kernel as I'm on 2.4.20-r7. I looked around and there > appeared to be six 2.4.22 kernels I could run: > > aa-sources 2.4.22r1 > ac-sources 2.4.22r1 > grsec-sources 2.4.22.1.9.12 > gs-sources 2.4.22_pre2 > openmosix-sources 2.4.22 > vanilla-sources 2.4.22 > > vanilla-sources sounded the most benign , so I grabbed it and ran across > this observation about the Athlon AP. If they don't want to modify > vanilla-sources (to keep it 'vanilla') then that's fine. > > I looked around and didn't spot any discussion of which one of these I > might want to run or why I'd choose ac-sources vs. gs-sources. Is there > a description somewhere of why all 6 are offered? Has there been any > discussion here or in the forums somewhere? > > Thanks again, > Mark
Mark, What I did is patch the 2.4.22 vanilla from kernel.org with the new ck-1 patches set, which works very well- close to 2.6 performance. It has preemptive, low-latency, etc. After you patch, add the athlon-xp stuff to the makefile, and it builds with those gcc flags. I do my compiling in /home/wrc/kernels, and su to root for modules_install, and copy bzImage. I find I have less problems that way. Here's a link to the Con Kolivas site. http://members.optusnet.com.au/ckolivas/kernel/#faq Robert Crawford -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
