On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 21:37, Simon Bolduc wrote: > Not true - I tried installing Eiger on a 486sx previously and it didn't work > with the standard kernel complaining about a lack of FPU on the chip. AFAIK > all 486sx CPUs shipped without FPU - altho I believe you could get add-on > chips for some mobos. A google search for 486 sx fpu generates lots of > results - here is a quote: > > "As with the earlier 386 family, Intel released a lower cost version of the > 486 and dubbed it 486 SX. The 486 SX was deliberately crippled by disabling > the FPU, but the integrated cache still made it a decent performer. It was > also clocked at lower speeds than the 486 DX: 16, 20, 25, and 33 MHz" > > >From here: > > http://lowendpc.com/tech/486.shtml
Simon, You're correct. I sent an apology for my incorrect information yesterday. I realized the information was wrong after looking in my old copy of "Upgrading and Repairing PCs" p203. > >From: Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein *non-FPU* Kernel image > >Date: 15 Apr 2002 09:36:51 -0700 > > > >On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 09:19, Mark Plowman wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > > > Has anyone got a Dachstein *non-FPU* Kernel image somewhere that I can > > > use for colleague who wants to use a 486 SX? > > > >Mark, > >All 486s have FPUs. The SX designator on a 486 indicates a lack of > >on-board L1 cache. The standard kernel should work on this machine. -- Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ _______________________________________________ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
