in 64-bit, with using the
Intel Quad 2.5Ghz Xeon, but I am unsure as to which version I should
be downloading.
For plesk, I need to use version 6.1 and had read somewhere that I
would use the AMD 64-bit version, can you confirm if this is correct
for an Intel processor?
A descriptive
The version is called amd64 because AMD published their spec first. (FYI)
the thing I have actually wondered is why i386 and amd64 are used as the naming
convention instead of x86 and x86-64 or x64
-Sean
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 05:13:16PM -0400, Sean Cavanaugh wrote:
The version is called amd64 because AMD published their spec first. (FYI)
the thing I have actually wondered is why i386 and amd64 are used as the
naming convention instead of x86 and x86-64 or x64
Just because
out i shud install lib32 on my 64 bit
machine.
How to install lib32's and from where ??
Thanks,
Navneet
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL
:
The problem is in the call retval = sysctl(mib, 4, kp, sz, NULL, 0);
where sz is size of kp and where kp is a structure of type kinfo_proc. The
size of this structure on 32bit system is 768 and on 64 bit system is 1088.
The call works on 32 bit system but when run on 64 bit system it coredumps
, because
If i hardcode the sz to 1088 then it works on amd64 systems , how do i deal
with it. I am anticipating lot of coredumps like that, what is a generic
solution for such kinds of problems.
to compile both versions.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Can anyone tell how do we handle this situation???
Is there any way or i have to compile my code on 64 bit machine??
what's a problem to compile on 64-bit machine?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
Binary compiled on 32 bit not running on 64 bit machine.
Actually i am using *sysctl* call and the *kinfo_proc* structure from
user.hin include/sys , size of structure on 32bit is 768 and on 64 bit
is around
1180 and thats why the call is failing and application coredumping.
Can anyone tell how
Am Dienstag, 19. Februar 2008 15:08:12 schrieb Wojciech Puchar:
Can anyone tell how do we handle this situation???
Is there any way or i have to compile my code on 64 bit machine??
what's a problem to compile on 64-bit machine?
Ugh, there can be lots of problems, at least if the original
a machine will be required (always) , i think i figured it out , ineed to
compile them using *amd64 *instead of i386 .
On 2/19/08, Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can anyone tell how do we handle this situation???
Is there any way or i have to compile my code on 64 bit
Hi ,
For our product we generally compile the binaries on 32 bit systems
and use them for both 32 and 64 bit systems. like we have same binaries for
32 bit and 64 bit RHEL.
We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
i.erunning binaries compiled on 32 bit FreeBSD
6.2
Am Montag, den 18.02.2008, 20:42 +0530 schrieb navneet Upadhyay:
it and 64 bit RHEL.
We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
i.erunning binaries compiled on 32 bit FreeBSD
6.2 on 64 bit FreeBSD system they produce *core dump.*
Any known reasons, do we have
navneet Upadhyay wrote:
Hi ,
For our product we generally compile the binaries on 32 bit systems
and use them for both 32 and 64 bit systems. like we have same binaries for
32 bit and 64 bit RHEL.
We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
i.erunning binaries
I checked in usr/local/ and didnt find the lib32 folder, so i guess they are
nt installed .
Why do i need them ? can u put some light on it ?
On 2/18/08, Norman Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Montag, den 18.02.2008, 20:42 +0530 schrieb navneet Upadhyay:
it and 64 bit RHEL.
We
bit
systems
and use them for both 32 and 64 bit systems. like we have same binaries
for
32 bit and 64 bit RHEL.
We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
i.erunning binaries compiled on 32 bit FreeBSD
6.2 on 64 bit FreeBSD system they produce *core dump
18.02.2008, 20:42 +0530 schrieb navneet Upadhyay:
it and 64 bit RHEL.
We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
i.erunning binaries compiled on 32 bit FreeBSD
6.2 on 64 bit FreeBSD system they produce *core dump.*
Any known reasons, do we have to compile
and use them for both 32 and 64 bit systems. like we have same binaries for
32 bit and 64 bit RHEL.
We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
i.erunning binaries compiled on 32 bit FreeBSD
6.2 on 64 bit FreeBSD system they produce *core dump.*
no idea. i use
navneet Upadhyay wrote:
On 2/18/08, Dominic Fandrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
navneet Upadhyay wrote:
Hi ,
For our product we generally compile the binaries on 32 bit
systems
and use them for both 32 and 64 bit systems. like we have same binaries
for
32 bit and 64 bit RHEL.
We
Hi,
I'm running FreeBSD 7 on an Athlon64 based machine with a 64 bit
kernel. The machine is supposed to be a server (at home) so there's
basically no Xorg involved.
Now I want to monitor what the system is doing and I decided to
install sysutils/conky from ports. The problem is that conky crashes
I didnt get what do you mean.
Do you mean :
I should install lib32 on freeBSD and then rebuild my applications in order
to make it work on 32 and 64 bit systems .
rite now I have built my app on 32 bit system (which is not having lib32
installed), it works on 32 bit freebsd but fails on 64 bit
bit systems. like we have same
binaries
for
32 bit and 64 bit RHEL.
We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
i.erunning binaries compiled on 32 bit FreeBSD
6.2 on 64 bit FreeBSD system they produce *core dump.*
Any known reasons, do we have to compile binaries on 64
Hi,
my Synaptics touchpad doesn't work on FreeBSD 200710 amd64. I've add
hw.psm.synaptics_support=1
to my /boot/loader.conf and I've compiled x11-drivers/synaptics and
x11-drivers/xf86-input-mouse.
My dmesg says:
psm0: PS/2 Mouse irq 12 on atkbdc0
psm0: [GIANT-LOCKED]
psm0: model Synaptics
compiled in sys/i386.
amd64 and i386 are different platforms in the same sense that sparc64
and ppc are different platforms. An AMD 64 is not back-compatible to
pentium pro code when it's in 64-bit mode. Whilst 32-bit binaries can
be run on the amd64 platform, they need special handling, you can't
are different platforms in the same sense that sparc64
and ppc are different platforms. An AMD 64 is not back-compatible to
pentium pro code when it's in 64-bit mode. Whilst 32-bit binaries can
be run on the amd64 platform, they need special handling, you can't
just mix-and-match world and kernel platforms
kernel with the old configuration and all is well. Of course the
old configuration was/is i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit
apps.
Are you sure about that? there are few compelling reasons to go to
64-bit, if you already have a working system. As far as performance is
concerned, it may go either
Processor
3800+ (2387.78-MHz 686-class CPU). I am still building a daily
kernel with the old configuration and all is well. Of course the
old configuration was/is i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit
apps.
No, you do not *need* to compile for 64-bit apps.
Are you sure about
are different platforms. An AMD 64 is not back-compatible to
pentium pro code when it's in 64-bit mode. Whilst 32-bit binaries can
be run on the amd64 platform, they need special handling, you can't
just mix-and-match world and kernel platforms.
___
freebsd
in the same sense that sparc64
and ppc are different platforms. An AMD 64 is not back-compatible to
pentium pro code when it's in 64-bit mode. Whilst 32-bit binaries can
be run on the amd64 platform, they need special handling, you can't
just mix-and-match world and kernel platforms.
Thanks, RW. I had
box with an AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor
3800+ (2387.78-MHz 686-class CPU). I am still building a daily
kernel with the old configuration and all is well. Of course the
old configuration was/is i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit
apps.
No, you do not *need* to compile for 64-bit apps
was/is i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit apps. I
have configured a slightly modified sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC kernel and
was going to build it as a test only to find out that a simple make
buildkernel KERNCONF=AMD doesn't find /sys/amd64/conf/AMD. There is
an old reference in UPDATING from
was/is i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit apps. I
have configured a slightly modified sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC kernel and
was going to build it as a test only to find out that a simple make
buildkernel KERNCONF=AMD doesn't find /sys/amd64/conf/AMD. There is
an old reference in UPDATING from
configuration and all is well. Of course the old configuration was/is
i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit apps. I have configured a slightly
modified sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC kernel and was going to build it as a test
only to find out that a simple make buildkernel KERNCONF=AMD doesn't
building a daily kernel with the
old configuration and all is well. Of course the old configuration was/is
i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit apps. I have configured a slightly
modified sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC kernel and was going to build it as a test
only to find out that a simple make
configuration and all is well. Of course the
old configuration was/is i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit
apps.
Are you sure about that? there are few compelling reasons to go to
64-bit, if you already have a working system. As far as performance is
concerned, it may go either way.
Right now all
Which build should I use to build a native 64-bit installation on an
Intel Core 2 Duo (E6600)? Can I use the AMD64 build? Is there anything
I should be careful when rebuilding from source after a cvsup? Can I
just use the AMD64 build and CPUTYPE=nocona in /etc/make.conf ?
Thanks in advance
Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
Which build should I use to build a native 64-bit installation on an
Intel Core 2 Duo (E6600)?
AMD64 kernel, SMP variant. Specific compiler optimizations will not
yield high enough benefits to be generally useful but it probably[*]
won't hurt you
An update for some who may care. I tried loading Live Linux distros: Puppy,
DSL and STD. They load fine but don't see a network interface. Also
installed Fedora 5 Linux Distro and same - no ethernet interface seen. It
has been a while but I recall that Windows XP pro will not boot.
Anybody have
On 2006/12/12 11:42, Y Sidhu seems to have typed:
a. SuperMicro X7DBR-8+ / X7DBR-I+
Seems that others have had problems with SuperMicro boards:
http://www.freebsd.org/platforms/amd64/motherboards.html
*** QUOTE ***
Boots stock SMP kernel. UP kernel must be booted in safe mode
*** END QUOTE
I am a newbie and have gone though past posts and have been looking at the
last couple of weeks of posts go by. I have not seen anything similar to my
problem. I cannot load an OS except under ACPI-Disabled. I can boot into
safe mode, but cannot configure a working network interface. Therefore, I
Hi,
I just purchased a new Intel Pentium 4(3.06Ghz), 533 Mhz FSB, supporting
EM64T (as written in the box).
It has 1 MB cache size, package type = LGA 775, processor number = 524
Features: (as shown in the dropdown combo box when cpu speed =3.06,
processor number = 524)
You Wrote:
I wonder if I could benefit from these features when running AMD64
version. On i386 install, I just enabled SMP and the OS happilly
reported 2 logical cpus, however, I'm not sure how I will build a
particular application to benefit from this hyperthreading thing.
Not all
, and are
trying to get plesk installed. But plesk isn't supported for FreeBSD
6.1 64-bit version yet, so it has been hard work to try trick it. Now
I want to trick the uname command to show the version needed for
plesk installation. Any one having an easy and pretty safe way to do
this? This is the last
to get plesk installed. But plesk isn't supported for
FreeBSD 6.1 64-bit version yet, so it has been hard work to try
trick it. Now I want to trick the uname command to show the
version needed for plesk installation. Any one having an easy and
pretty safe way to do this? This is the last try
Hello
I've got FreeBSD 6.1 installed on a Sun Fire X2100 server, and are
trying to get plesk installed. But plesk isn't supported for FreeBSD
6.1 64-bit version yet, so it has been hard work to try trick it. Now
I want to trick the uname command to show the version needed for
plesk
Processor 3700+/4000+
#12288; (2.20~2.40GHz, 1MB L2 cache, socket 939)
Core Logic #12290;VIA K8T890CE + VT8237R
Display #12290;17.1 WXGA (1440x900) TFT / 17.1
WSXGA+ (1680x1050) / 17.1 WUXGA (1920x1200) TFT
Memory #12290;Two 64-bit wide DDR data channels
#12290;Two 200-pin SODIMM sockets
. With default FreeBSD/i386 - it will be at least 30%.
just because it's not just 64-bit addresses, but twice the registers
(r8-r15) allowing C compiler to generate more efficient code.
For now AMD64 is the fastest and cheapest architecture - at least
with AMD processors, not intel clones. (YES now intel
Generally speaking, mail and file server are not RAM intensive. A 32
proc can directly address 4GB RAM (2**32). FreeBSD allows you to
address more than 4GB on a 32 bit proc but limited to 4GB max per
process. The actual per process limit will be a bit less, I think.
A 64 bit proc can
64-bit addresses, but twice
the registers (r8-r15) allowing C compiler to generate more efficient
code.
For now AMD64 is the fastest and cheapest architecture - at least with AMD
processors, not intel clones. (YES now intel makes clones of AMD
processors
/i386 - it will be at least 30%.
just because it's not just 64-bit addresses, but twice the
registers (r8-r15) allowing C compiler to generate more efficient
code.
For now AMD64 is the fastest and cheapest architecture - at least
with AMD processors, not intel clones. (YES now intel makes
I hope that I'm not starting some sort of holy war with this question,
but here I'll go.
I'm planning to set-up some e-mail / file servers running FreeBSD 6.1 in
the near future and I'm wondering if it will be worth the cost to use 64
but CPU's for this.
Also I would like to know which
On Thursday 22 June 2006 17:06, pete wright wrote:
Did you try to build/install a 32bit version of VNC? Also, if you are
running a Unix like OS why use VNC? You can achive %90 of the same
features (with less of a memory/cpu impact) by running X apps
remotely.
-pete
How do you do
screen?
/usr/port/sysutils/screen
My users need up to 20 instances of a graphical analysis package
which has a text-based control window that spawns two graphical
windows. They run a window manager with 24 virtual desktops,
each running an instance of this program. As much as I love
On 21/06/06 Nikolas Britton said:
The consensus seems to be that FreeBSD/amd64 is a tad slower then
FreeBSD/i386 because it has to deal with 32 extra bits. The primary
reason to use FreeBSD/amd64 seems to be if you need greater then 4GB
of RAM.
This should give you the speed boost your
On 6/23/06, Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 21/06/06 Nikolas Britton said:
The consensus seems to be that FreeBSD/amd64 is a tad slower then
FreeBSD/i386 because it has to deal with 32 extra bits. The primary
reason to use FreeBSD/amd64 seems to be if you need greater then 4GB
G'day everyone,
I recently had to replace a disk and took the opportunity to
upgrade from 5-stable to 6-stable. I also changed from the
32-bit to the 64-bit version. I have a dual Opteron server.
VNC installed from ports (4.2.1) doesn't work on the 64-bit machine.
The same version installed
I have the same ,problem,But I have never run on other version,I use
RELENG_6_1, AMD64
On 6/22/06, Greg Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
G'day everyone,
I recently had to replace a disk and took the opportunity to
upgrade from 5-stable to 6-stable. I also changed from the
32-bit to the 64-bit
) work all right. YMMV.
I have tried to make NXWindows work on amd64 but there is just too much
patching that needs to be done for my meager skills.
Thanks for the info. I had figured something like this. I installed
the 64-bit system anticipating a future memory upgrade from the current
4GB
On 6/22/06, Greg Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 03:06:46PM -0700, pete wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did you try to build/install a 32bit version of VNC?
Thanks for the suggestion.
I thought about doing that, but there is still other essential
software that is not 64
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 03:06:46PM -0700, pete wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did you try to build/install a 32bit version of VNC?
Thanks for the suggestion.
I thought about doing that, but there is still other essential
software that is not 64-bit clean and our entire group needs
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 04:15:47PM -0700, pete wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hmm, so there is no way to run the app's which are not 64bit clean in
32bit mode in your environment?
I did test one of them. It works, but I don't have time to
mess with all of them, and finding the 32-bit
using gtk) crash the
VNC server, and some (KDE) work all right. YMMV.
I have tried to make NXWindows work on amd64 but there is just too much
patching that needs to be done for my meager skills.
Thanks for the info. I had figured something like this. I installed
the 64-bit system anticipating
Michael P. Soulier wrote:
On 20/06/06 Andy Reitz said:
I believe that ia64 refers to the Itanium port of FreeBSD, and I'm not
sure of the i386 version will install on Itanium. Are you referring to the
AMD64/EMT-64 port of FreeBSD?
It's a 64-bit P4. My i386 5.4 install works fine.
Mike
On 6/20/06, Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 20/06/06 Andy Reitz said:
I believe that ia64 refers to the Itanium port of FreeBSD, and I'm not
sure of the i386 version will install on Itanium. Are you referring to the
AMD64/EMT-64 port of FreeBSD?
It's a 64-bit P4. My i386 5.4
On 21/06/06 Nikolas Britton said:
IA64 = Itanium, Itanium2 = FreeBSD/ia64
EM64T = Intel CPUs with AMD64 (P4, Xeon, etc.) = FreeBSD/amd64
AMD64 = Opteron, Athlon 64, Turion 64, Sempron 64 = FreeBSD/amd64
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM64T
Why do you need to run in 64-bit mode?
I'm asking
/EM64T
Why do you need to run in 64-bit mode?
I'm asking that myself. I'd like to do comparisons with and without 64-bit
support.
The consensus seems to be that FreeBSD/amd64 is a tad slower then
FreeBSD/i386 because it has to deal with 32 extra bits. The primary
reason to use FreeBSD/amd64 seems
/EM64T
Why do you need to run in 64-bit mode?
I'm asking that myself. I'd like to do comparisons with and without 64-bit
support.
The consensus seems to be that FreeBSD/amd64 is a tad slower then
FreeBSD/i386 because it has to deal with 32 extra bits. The primary
reason to use FreeBSD/amd64 seems
Hello,
I recently got an ia64 box at work, and I threw my i386 freebsd 5.4 on it.
Now, is there a way to rebuild world with 64-bit support from there?
Thanks,
Mike
--
Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It
takes a touch of genius
On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, Michael P. Soulier wrote:
Hello,
I recently got an ia64 box at work, and I threw my i386 freebsd 5.4 on it.
Now, is there a way to rebuild world with 64-bit support from there?
Hi Mike,
I believe that ia64 refers to the Itanium port of FreeBSD, and I'm not
sure
--- Michael P. Soulier
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I recently got an ia64 box at work, and I threw
my i386 freebsd 5.4 on it.
Now, is there a way to rebuild world with
64-bit support from there?
Thanks,
Mike
Everything I've tested runs slower in 64-bit mode
(mainly because
On 20/06/06 Andy Reitz said:
I believe that ia64 refers to the Itanium port of FreeBSD, and I'm not
sure of the i386 version will install on Itanium. Are you referring to the
AMD64/EMT-64 port of FreeBSD?
It's a 64-bit P4. My i386 5.4 install works fine.
Mike
--
Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL
Hi All
I am running freebsd 4.11 release and want to have
net-snmp to support 64 bit counter
I deinstall the net-snmp but don't know how to
re-complie the port to support
--enable-mfd-rewrites
I changed the Makefile and recomplied it and it
doesn't work
snmpwalk -v 2c -c x localhost
In the last episode (May 03), adrian kok said:
I am running freebsd 4.11 release and want to have
net-snmp to support 64 bit counter
FreeBSD's internal network counters are 32-bit, so it won't help you.
--
Dan Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED
running freebsd 4.11 release and want to have
net-snmp to support 64 bit counter
FreeBSD's internal network counters are 32-bit, so
it won't help you.
--
Dan Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
the switch
ports they are plugged into. I use Cisco and HP switches and they have
supported 64-bit SNMP counters for years. For servers attached to
unmanaged switches, I poll their 32-bit counters every minute and
accept that I can't graph very high traffic rates.
--
Dan Nelson
Gentlemen,
I have spent several days reading all the documentation I can find but no
reference to my problem.
linux compatibility:
# kldload linux#
OR
linux_enable=YES
both work on my FreeBSD 5.4 32 bit athlon.
On my opteron and athlon64 machines with FreeBSD 5.4 or 6.0 (both 64 bit
I'm buying a new computer, and am thinking of the new dual core AMD X2.
I'm not sure I want to run 64 bit kernel yet, because of driver support and
things like flash, and video, etc..
Will this processor still be as fast as a 32 bit if I use i386 kernel?
Do I have to use a SMP kernel
I have a couple questions about the AMD64 Project.
1. They page mentions that there is multiprocessor support. Does
this include the dual core processors? Will the OS dispatch processes
and threads to each core?
2. While the OS will use the 64 bit mode, will the applications still
run
Le 18/01/2006 à 17:40:00-0500, Anthony Dematteo a écrit
I have a couple questions about the AMD64 Project.
1. They page mentions that there is multiprocessor support. Does
this include the dual core processors? Will the OS dispatch processes
and threads to each core?
I only can answer
if I'm the right person to answer this in great technical
detail, but I think the answer is 'yes' to both questions.
2. While the OS will use the 64 bit mode, will the applications still
run in the compatibly mode?
Not necessarily. By default the base system and any applications you
compile
- From: Amandeep [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am instalaling FreeBSD 5.3 AMD 64 bit with 6- 200GB drives. Using
Higpoint 1820A controller and doing RAID 10. I am using drivers for
the card from Highpoint Web.
The problem is when I make the partitions and the machine tries to
format the partitions
Hi all,
I am instalaling FreeBSD 5.3 AMD 64 bit with 6- 200GB drives. Using
Higpoint 1820A controller and doing RAID 10. I am using drivers for the
card from Highpoint Web.
The problem is when I make the partitions and the machine tries to
format the partitions it says:
unable to find
Hi guys,
Anyone???
Amandeep wrote:
Hi all,
I am instalaling FreeBSD 5.3 AMD 64 bit with 6- 200GB drives. Using
Higpoint 1820A controller and doing RAID 10. I am using drivers for
the card from Highpoint Web.
The problem is when I make the partitions and the machine tries to
format
PROTECTED]
I am instalaling FreeBSD 5.3 AMD 64 bit with 6- 200GB drives. Using
Higpoint 1820A controller and doing RAID 10. I am using drivers for
the card from Highpoint Web.
The problem is when I make the partitions and the machine tries to
format the partitions it says:
unable to find
Hello,
I think it's a question for the highpoint support. It's their product
and their driver.
Here are some instant hints:
- read the PDF carefully and follow the instructions strictly
- use the BIOS in the tarball; nothing else!!
Regards Björn
ones here...
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8796_11869%
5E11880,00.html
2) Is there any performance penalty to (1) if I can.
3) Is the 64 bit AMD port of FreeBSD stable?
Many thanks for your time
Michael
On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 12:44:12PM +, Michael Hopkins, Hopkins Research
wrote:
3) Is the 64 bit AMD port of FreeBSD stable?
Yes, remarkably so.
Kris
pgpZj8CScgJmj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Will FreeBSD 5.3 Run on this Hardware Configuration
CPU
Network Cards
I would also like to Hardware Raid 5 with the Intel Raid Card
Would this be seamless to FreeBSD?
5U Intel SC5300 Rack Mount Black
Dual Intel CPU Xeon 3GHz CPU, 64-bit, 1mb cache
Intel Gigabit Ethernet x 2
2 GB ECC memory
4 144GB
hi everyone.
i just want to know if anyone has had any major issues
running freebsd on 64bit architecture.
i am wanting to buy a asus a8v deluxe - 939 via k8t800
pro motherboard with a amd athlon64 939 3500+ chip.
If anyone has any experience, id love to listen to
your do's and don'ts.
eodyna wrote:
hi everyone.
i just want to know if anyone has had any major issues
running freebsd on 64bit architecture.
i am wanting to buy a asus a8v deluxe - 939 via k8t800
pro motherboard with a amd athlon64 939 3500+ chip.
If anyone has any experience, id love to listen to
your do's and
into a current manpage from www.freebsd.org, and it says
something about 4.x compatibility.
What is the best way to go if I need to write scripts now, but I'm
planning to switch to 5.x later? Can I upgrade expr(1) now? If not,
what should I do?
In 4.x, expr does 64-bit math by default
Hi,
I'm counting traffic with ipfw and shell scripts. Is there a way to use
more than 32-bit numbers in shell arithmetic?
Regards,
Andrew P.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe,
In the last episode (Sep 30), Andrew said:
I'm counting traffic with ipfw and shell scripts. Is there a way to
use more than 32-bit numbers in shell arithmetic?
POSIX only requires signed long support in the shell, but FreeBSD's
expr command has a -e flag that will let it do 64-bit math
it do 64-bit math:
$ echo $(( 65536*65536 ))
0
$ echo $(expr 65536 * 65536)
0
$ echo $(expr -e 65536 * 65536)
4294967296
bash, ksh93 (but not pdksh), and zsh's shell arithmetic are all
64-bit,
also.
Thanks! I haven't thought about using expr.
How come that my expr(1) manpage has nothing
something about 4.x compatibility.
What is the best way to go if I need to write scripts now, but I'm
planning to switch to 5.x later? Can I upgrade expr(1) now? If not,
what should I do?
In 4.x, expr does 64-bit math by default. Apparently POSIX requires
that expr use whatever the systems
On Sun, 1 Aug 2004, [iso-8859-1] adrian kok wrote:
Hi all
Can freebsd run on 64 bit CPU?
Thank you very much
Which 64bit CPU?
Rus
--
e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : t: 1-888-327-6330
http://www.jvds.com - Root on your own box
http://www.vpscolo.com - Your next hosting company
http://jvdsblog.jvds.com
On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 07:32:01PM +0800, adrian kok wrote:
Can freebsd run on 64 bit CPU?
Yes. Take your pick of AMD64, UltraSparc, Alpha, IA64 and then
there's a bunch of other architectures in progress, including MIPS
and PPC.
But I'm perplexed as to why you need to ask here when
Bill Moran wrote:
I'm inheriting some hardware.
These boards have 64-bit PCI SATA cards jammed in 32-bit PCI slots. Oddly
enough, the boxen boot and start Linux (which will be replaced with FreeBSD
when I'm done)
I guess my question is hardware-related. I mean, I can't believe this
worked! Has
I'm inheriting some hardware.
These boards have 64-bit PCI SATA cards jammed in 32-bit PCI slots. Oddly
enough, the boxen boot and start Linux (which will be replaced with FreeBSD
when I'm done)
I guess my question is hardware-related. I mean, I can't believe this
worked! Has anyone else
In the last episode (Jul 30), Bill Moran said:
I'm inheriting some hardware.
These boards have 64-bit PCI SATA cards jammed in 32-bit PCI slots. Oddly
enough, the boxen boot and start Linux (which will be replaced with
FreeBSD when I'm done)
I guess my question is hardware-related. I
On Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 04:32:30PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
I'm inheriting some hardware.
These boards have 64-bit PCI SATA cards jammed in 32-bit PCI slots. Oddly
enough, the boxen boot and start Linux (which will be replaced with FreeBSD
when I'm done)
I guess my question is hardware
201 - 300 of 308 matches
Mail list logo
