Re: amd64, 57600 serial install help
On 21/07/2012 22:06, Ihsan Junaidi Ibrahim wrote: I assume you have compiled the bootblocks as per the instruction in the handbook. Second, do you have more than one serial port on the box because FreeBSD can only work its serial console magic on only one port at a time. If you redirect your IPMI serial console or just a normal serial console, take note it's interrupt number in the BIOS. You'll need to append the 0x10 flags to your UART device in device.hints file if the you plug in the cable at a non-default port. i have submitted a PR re this as a serial install on 8.3 works fine. Paul. -- - Paul Macdonald IFDNRG Ltd Web and video hosting - t: 0131 5548070 m: 07970339546 e: p...@ifdnrg.com w: http://www.ifdnrg.com - IFDNRG 40 Maritime Street Edinburgh EH6 6SA - ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64, 57600 serial install help
I assume you have compiled the bootblocks as per the instruction in the handbook. Second, do you have more than one serial port on the box because FreeBSD can only work its serial console magic on only one port at a time. If you redirect your IPMI serial console or just a normal serial console, take note it's interrupt number in the BIOS. You'll need to append the 0x10 flags to your UART device in device.hints file if the you plug in the cable at a non-default port. ihsan On Jul 22, 2012, at 1:47 AM, Paul Macdonald wrote: what am i doing wrong here? From rebuilding the install iso and from the handbook instructions here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/install-advanced.html which suggests that in /boot/loader.conf only console=comconsole is required, i have tried this and also explicity setting speed in boot/loader.conf console=comconsole comconsole_speed=57600 i have also tried having the settings i use to access via serial post install ie: /etc/ttys:ttyu0 /usr/libexec/getty std.57600 vt100 on secure and /boot/config: -D but same result, install stops ( or goes elsewhere at point below) It does boot stage 1 and stage 2 then i get nothing? test serial output: - CD Loader 1.2 r Configuration Menu ... Building the boot loader arguments Looking up /BOOT/LOADER... Found Relocating the loader and the BTX Starting the BTX loader BTX loader 1.00 BTX version is 1.02 Consoles: internal video/keyboard BIOS CD is cd0 in 5 sec.. BIOS drive A: is disk0 BIOS drive C: is disk1 BIOS 640kB/3668736kB available memory FreeBSD/x86 bootstrap loader, Revision 1.1 (r...@farrell.cse.buffalo.edu, Tue Jan 3 06:51:49 UTC 2012) (nothing after this point) -- - Paul Macdonald IFDNRG Ltd Web and video hosting - t: 0131 5548070 m: 07970339546 e: p...@ifdnrg.com w: http://www.ifdnrg.com - IFDNRG 40 Maritime Street Edinburgh EH6 6SA - ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: AMD64 with 9.0 PRERELEASE freezing/hanging without any messages
On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 04:54:18 -0600, Jukka A. Ukkonen j...@iki.fi wrote: Hello, Has anyone else noticed a similar odd behavior with AMD64 and 9.0 prerelease (as well as RCs and betas)? On my 12 core (2*4162EE) the whole system just freezes quite often without any warning, without any messages being logged. Neither is there any panic message from the kernel. The system just suddenly hangs such that there is no alternative but to reboot using the reset button. YES YES YES This is happening right now on my little Atom based ZFS NAS and it's driving me insane. 9.0-PRERELEASE compiled with Clang (don't think that matters though). However, mine doesn't fully panic and recovers. It justs completely freezes for like 5-10 seconds. Won't take any keyboard input, doesn't show anything on console/SSH, but is still pingable. Crazy! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: AMD64 with 9.0 PRERELEASE freezing/hanging without any messages
On 11/19/11 03:54, Jukka A. Ukkonen wrote: Hello, Has anyone else noticed a similar odd behavior with AMD64 and 9.0 prerelease (as well as RCs and betas)? On my 12 core (2*4162EE) the whole system just freezes quite often without any warning, without any messages being logged. Neither is there any panic message from the kernel. The system just suddenly hangs such that there is no alternative but to reboot using the reset button. At the moment I don't have any further info about the cause of the problem, but quite often the freeze has happened when there has been some network activity. Does anyone have an idea how to start tracking down such a problem? I mean anything in addition to this... http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/developers-handbook/kerneldebug-options.html Cheers, // jau .--- ..- -.- -.- .-.- .-.-.-..- -.- -.- --- -. . -. /Jukka A. Ukkonen, Oxit Ltd, Finland /__ M.Sc. (sw-eng cs)(Phone) +358-500-606-671 / Internet: Jukka.Ukkonen(a)Oxit.Fi /Internet: jau(a)iki.fi v .--- .- ..- ...-.- .. -.- .. .-.-.- ..-. .. + + + + My opinions are mine and mine alone, not my employers. + + + + ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org I experienced this a rather long time ago with an AMD X2600 (Barton?) processor. The machine would freeze when I did some rapid mousing/clicking in and out of a window. Nothing in the logs. If I stayed out of X things were just fine but this was my home machine and why should I have to stay out of X? I figured FBSD dev was just running behind the Intel dev and time would fix it. Or Xorg dev would even up. In any case it went away in the next release. It was never *that* much of a problem; consistent but not often. Your freezing appears to be more frequent than was mine. At this point in the release cycle I think the only issues they find are for weird corner cases. Perhaps you have one. Or it's hardware :( Try a different NIC for a while. r ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: AMD64 with 9.0 PRERELEASE freezing/hanging without any messages
On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 12:54:18 +0200 (EET) j...@iki.fi (Jukka A. Ukkonen) wrote: Hello, Has anyone else noticed a similar odd behavior with AMD64 and 9.0 prerelease (as well as RCs and betas)? Yes, I've seen a few of these myself, under both of the RCs and PRERELEASE. No idea what the cause is, though. Impossible to track down. On my 12 core (2*4162EE) the whole system just freezes quite often without any warning, without any messages being logged. Neither is there any panic message from the kernel. The system just suddenly hangs such that there is no alternative but to reboot using the reset button. Yes, exactly the same here. Doesn't happen often, but it does happen. At the moment I don't have any further info about the cause of the problem, but quite often the freeze has happened when there has been some network activity. Does anyone have an idea how to start tracking down such a problem? I mean anything in addition to this... http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/developers-handbook/kerneldebug-options.html Sorry, wish I had a clue as to how to pinpoint the cause of these hangs. There's no record anywhere of what may have gone wrong. If you find out anything, please let us know. -- Conrad J. Sabatier conr...@cox.net ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64
On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 08:58:49PM -0500, Depo Catcher wrote: On 8/9/2010 4:14 PM, Robert Huff wrote: Polytropon writes: I've installed FreeBSD-amd64. It runs very well. The packages I fetch are amd64 too, but what about the ports I compile myself? Are those amd64 too? Yes, as your compiler infrastructure and target platform is amd64, and so is the resulting binary code. How does it know your are on amd64? gcc auto detect of CPU? Because that is what you installed and booted. The chip doesn't matter - built by AMD or Intell. What matters is the type of chip. jerry ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64
On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:19:31 +0200, Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl wrote: I've installed FreeBSD-amd64. It runs very well. The packages I fetch are amd64 too, but what about the ports I compile myself? Are those amd64 too? Yes, as your compiler infrastructure and target platform is amd64, and so is the resulting binary code. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64
On Monday 09 of August 2010 23:19:31 Dick Hoogendijk wrote: I've installed FreeBSD-amd64. It runs very well. The packages I fetch are amd64 too, but what about the ports I compile myself? Are those amd64 too? Of cource! When you make them they are compiled using the amd64 libraries and instruction set Best regards Elias ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64
Polytropon writes: I've installed FreeBSD-amd64. It runs very well. The packages I fetch are amd64 too, but what about the ports I compile myself? Are those amd64 too? Yes, as your compiler infrastructure and target platform is amd64, and so is the resulting binary code. More importantly, if it isn't amd64 compatible - some ports aren't - it should tell you. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64
On 8/9/2010 4:14 PM, Robert Huff wrote: Polytropon writes: I've installed FreeBSD-amd64. It runs very well. The packages I fetch are amd64 too, but what about the ports I compile myself? Are those amd64 too? Yes, as your compiler infrastructure and target platform is amd64, and so is the resulting binary code. How does it know your are on amd64? gcc auto detect of CPU? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64
On 8/9/2010 4:14 PM, Robert Huff wrote: Polytropon writes: I've installed FreeBSD-amd64. It runs very well. The packages I fetch are amd64 too, but what about the ports I compile myself? Are those amd64 too? Yes, as your compiler infrastructure and target platform is amd64, and so is the resulting binary code. How does it know your are on amd64? gcc auto detect of CPU? As the other person wrote, the base system compiler suite and other base system utilities are configured and compiled to build and use amd64 binaries by default. There is only limited support for cross-building: on amd64, for example, there are some provisions for building and using 32-bit, i386 binaries; and the base system sources have some limited support for cross-building for other architectures, by setting certain variables in the build environment. In general, one cannot just build and use any binaries on a given architecture. b. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64 8.0 with zfs root and raidz ?
Gene == Gene f...@brightstar.bomgardner.net writes: Gene I'm still working out just what everything does, but the one thing I've Gene noticed is that it doesn't address raidz at all. Can anyone direct me to any Gene docs that might help? Or does anyone know where in the wiki page's intructions Gene raidz might be set up? You're not going to be raidz'ing your boot disk, which is why that doesn't address it there. Data disks can be raidz'ed just fine, using the normal documentation. -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 mer...@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/ Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64 won't install on Core Duo
What system board revision does you're Thinkpad have? You can use CPU-Z (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php) to check on this. The revision 3 and above system boards can run 64bit OS's. Also if you're CPU is one of the following a a BIOS upgrade/setting may enable the full set of processor features : SL9K4 2.33 GHzT2700 2 667 MHz 65 nm D0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL9JN 2.16 GHzT2600 2 667 MHz 65 nm D0 2 MB Micro-FCPGA N/A SL8VS 2.16 GHzT2600 2 667 MHz 65 nm C0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL9K3 2.16 GHzT2600 2 667 MHz 65 nm D0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL9EH 2 GHz T2500 2 667 MHz 65 nm D0 2 MBMicro-FCPGA N/A SL8VP 2 GHz T2500 2 667 MHz 65 nm C0 2 MBMicro-FCPGA N/A SL9K2 2 GHz T2500 2 667 MHz 65 nm D0 2 MBMicro-FCBGA N/A SL9JU 1.83 GHzL2500 2 667 MHz 65 nm D0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL8VU 1.83 GHzT2400 2 667 MHz 65 nm C0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL9JZ 1.83 GHzT2400 2 667 MHz 65 nm D0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL9JM 1.83 GHzT2400 2 667 MHz 65 nm D0 2 MB Micro-FCPGA N/A SL8VW 1.66 GHzL2400 2 667 MHz 65 nm C0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL8VV 1.66 GHzT2300 2 667 MHz 65 nm C0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL9JT 1.66 GHzL2400 2 667 MHz 65 nm D0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL9JL 1.66 GHzT2300 2 667 MHz 65 nm D0 2 MB Micro-FCPGA N/A SL9JS 1.50 GHzL2300 2 667 MHz 65 nm C0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL8VX 1.50 GHzL2300 2 667 MHz 65 nm C0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL99V 1.20 GHzU2500 2 533 MHz 65 nm C0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A SL99W 1.06 GHzU2400 2 533 MHz 65 nm C0 2 MB Micro-FCBGA N/A On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: The amd64 arch installer for 8.0-RELEASE fails to start on a ThinkPad T60 with an Intel Centrino Core Duo. What am I doing wrong? error message: CPU doesn't support long mode -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] -- Opportunity is most often missed by people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. Thomas Alva Edison Inventor of 1093 patents, including: The light bulb, phonogram and motion pictures. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64 won't install on Core Duo
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 03:19:31PM +0200, Ross Cameron wrote: What system board revision does you're Thinkpad have? You can use CPU-Z (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php) to check on this. That looks like a handy tool. Is there a version that will run on FreeBSD? -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] pgpjj5iP9Eea4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: amd64 won't install on Core Duo
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 03:19:31PM +0200, Ross Cameron wrote: What system board revision does you're Thinkpad have? You can use CPU-Z (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php) to check on this. That looks like a handy tool. Is there a version that will run on FreeBSD? Something like sysutils/dmidecode maybe? Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64 won't install on Core Duo
On 3/5/2010 6:28 PM, Chad Perrin wrote: The amd64 arch installer for 8.0-RELEASE fails to start on a ThinkPad T60 with an Intel Centrino Core Duo. What am I doing wrong? error message: CPU doesn't support long mode You have a CPU that does not have 64-bit extensions. You need to install the i386 version. -- Tim Daneliuk tun...@tundraware.com PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64 won't install on Core Duo
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:30:48PM -0600, Tim Daneliuk wrote: On 3/5/2010 6:28 PM, Chad Perrin wrote: The amd64 arch installer for 8.0-RELEASE fails to start on a ThinkPad T60 with an Intel Centrino Core Duo. What am I doing wrong? error message: CPU doesn't support long mode You have a CPU that does not have 64-bit extensions. You need to install the i386 version. Oh, crap, you're right. I was thinking 64b, but it's 32b instruction set dual core. My mistake. Please disregard my brain-dead question. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] pgpDOrtAoR8ll.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: amd64: Fatal Trap 12 in high load situations
ms80 wrote: Hi I have a problem installing / upgrading FreeBSD 8.0-release on a new machine. The computers specs are: cpu: AMD Phenom II X4 board: Gigabyte MA790GPT-UD3H ram: 4x2GBytes DDR3/1333 hdd: 2xMaxtor STM31000528AS nic: 4x Intel(R) PRO/1000 [snip] So here are my questions: 1. Are there any known caveats or quirks regarding my hardware? 2. What can I do to further investigate this issue 3. Not fully on topic but might be related: The buildsystem recognizes my cpu as 686 class cpu wich is wrong. Are there any switches I can set in make.conf to have 'make' use the correct values? Currently I'm using a blank make.conf, meaning it is not present (as it is by default on a fresh installed system). [snip] I am using this motherboard with an AMD x4 630 Propus cpu and 4G Ram (2x2GB). I have done a basic overclock to 3.36GHz with the ram running at 1600MHz. This is my KDE4 desktop machine running FreeBSD 8 and all ports currently up to date. When selecting the RAM to put on this motherboard you should have consulted the list from Gigabyte for approved memory and chosen very carefully. The memory I actually have was not an exact line item from the list, but it was something extremely close and which was designed and manufactured for use with an AM3 socket motherboard. You will notice that some RAM today is designed for Intel P55 chipsets and Lynnfield processors while other RAM is designed specifically for AM3/AM2 socket use. It is probably not a good idea to disregard this during selection, e.g. memory not specifically meant for AM3 socket mobos may not function correctly. I also seem to recall seeing somewhere that this motherboard acquires limitations in overclocking when all 4 sockets are filled and the best overclocking results when only 2 sockets are in use. I am only using 2 sockets in a 2x2GB arrangement for 4GB RAM total. If you are not overclocking and have all 4 sockets filled you may not be able to go above 1066MHz memory multiplier. With only 2 sockets populated 1333MHz should be attainable. I believe your problem centers around memory. It may not be designed for AM3 socket and/or may not be able to handle a higher memory multiplier. When I first put this motherboard in I attempted to boot from an already installed OS with the memory multiplier set too high and saw numerous examples similar to what you are describing. Since I had bought 1600MHz memory I mistakenly set the multiplier too high. When I set it back to 1333MHz everything was fine. Either the memory multiplier is set too high for your RAM or it is just the wrong RAM to begin with. As far as make.conf goes I use: CPUTYPE?= k8 -Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64: Fatal Trap 12 in high load situations
Am Saturday 06 February 2010 11:38:25 schrob Michael Powell: ms80 wrote: Hi I have a problem installing / upgrading FreeBSD 8.0-release on a new machine. The computers specs are: cpu: AMD Phenom II X4 board: Gigabyte MA790GPT-UD3H ram: 4x2GBytes DDR3/1333 hdd: 2xMaxtor STM31000528AS nic: 4x Intel(R) PRO/1000 [snip] So here are my questions: 1. Are there any known caveats or quirks regarding my hardware? 2. What can I do to further investigate this issue 3. Not fully on topic but might be related: The buildsystem recognizes my cpu as 686 class cpu wich is wrong. Are there any switches I can set in make.conf to have 'make' use the correct values? Currently I'm using a blank make.conf, meaning it is not present (as it is by default on a fresh installed system). [snip] [snip too] I believe your problem centers around memory. It may not be designed for AM3 socket and/or may not be able to handle a higher memory multiplier. When I first put this motherboard in I attempted to boot from an already installed OS with the memory multiplier set too high and saw numerous examples similar to what you are describing. Since I had bought 1600MHz memory I mistakenly set the multiplier too high. When I set it back to 1333MHz everything was fine. Either the memory multiplier is set too high for your RAM or it is just the wrong RAM to begin with. As far as make.conf goes I use: CPUTYPE?= k8 -Mike Hi Thank you for your reply. I'm using two of this: OCZ3P1333LVAM4GK (OCZ DDR3 AMD Edition, rated for 1333MHz at 1.65V). My Board is rated for 1066 - 1600 MHz memory, and neither the website nor the manual say anything about limitations with memory. Anyway: I didn't overclock cpu or memory. I have stability and long life in mind, so I try to keep the hardware cool. During testing I underclocked the memory with 1066 and 800 MHz which didn't help: The machine crashes anyway. The only thing to note is that by default the board tries to set 1.5V DDR3 Voltage which is wrong, you have to set it to 1.65V manually. A faulty piece of hardware was the first thing I suspected and I tested among other things the memory with memtest86+. This runs fine for 4 passes, without any error. As far as I can tell, my memory subsystem is ok. As for make.conf: thanks, I will set this when I try again. with best regards Sven -- 00 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64: Fatal Trap 12 in high load situations
On 6 February 2010 22:18, ms80 m...@dynamik.sytes.net wrote: Am Saturday 06 February 2010 11:38:25 schrob Michael Powell: ms80 wrote: Hi I have a problem installing / upgrading FreeBSD 8.0-release on a new machine. The computers specs are: cpu: AMD Phenom II X4 board: Gigabyte MA790GPT-UD3H ram: 4x2GBytes DDR3/1333 hdd: 2xMaxtor STM31000528AS nic: 4x Intel(R) PRO/1000 [snip] So here are my questions: 1. Are there any known caveats or quirks regarding my hardware? 2. What can I do to further investigate this issue 3. Not fully on topic but might be related: The buildsystem recognizes my cpu as 686 class cpu wich is wrong. Are there any switches I can set in make.conf to have 'make' use the correct values? Currently I'm using a blank make.conf, meaning it is not present (as it is by default on a fresh installed system). [snip] [snip too] I believe your problem centers around memory. It may not be designed for AM3 socket and/or may not be able to handle a higher memory multiplier. When I first put this motherboard in I attempted to boot from an already installed OS with the memory multiplier set too high and saw numerous examples similar to what you are describing. Since I had bought 1600MHz memory I mistakenly set the multiplier too high. When I set it back to 1333MHz everything was fine. Either the memory multiplier is set too high for your RAM or it is just the wrong RAM to begin with. As far as make.conf goes I use: CPUTYPE?= k8 -Mike Hi Thank you for your reply. I'm using two of this: OCZ3P1333LVAM4GK (OCZ DDR3 AMD Edition, rated for 1333MHz at 1.65V). My Board is rated for 1066 - 1600 MHz memory, and neither the website nor the manual say anything about limitations with memory. Anyway: I didn't overclock cpu or memory. I have stability and long life in mind, so I try to keep the hardware cool. During testing I underclocked the memory with 1066 and 800 MHz which didn't help: The machine crashes anyway. The only thing to note is that by default the board tries to set 1.5V DDR3 Voltage which is wrong, you have to set it to 1.65V manually. A faulty piece of hardware was the first thing I suspected and I tested among other things the memory with memtest86+. This runs fine for 4 passes, without any error. As far as I can tell, my memory subsystem is ok. As for make.conf: thanks, I will set this when I try again. with best regards Sven -- 00 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org What power supply do you have? How many watts? brand? If you have insufficient power, it may cause the system to become unstable. Regards David N ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64: Fatal Trap 12 in high load situations
ms80 wrote: [snip] Thank you for your reply. I'm using two of this: OCZ3P1333LVAM4GK (OCZ DDR3 AMD Edition, rated for 1333MHz at 1.65V). My Board is rated for 1066 - 1600 MHz memory, and neither the website nor the manual say anything about limitations with memory. Anyway: I didn't overclock cpu or memory. I have stability and long life in mind, so I try to keep the hardware cool. During testing I underclocked the memory with 1066 and 800 MHz which didn't help: The machine crashes anyway. The only thing to note is that by default the board tries to set 1.5V DDR3 Voltage which is wrong, you have to set it to 1.65V manually. A faulty piece of hardware was the first thing I suspected and I tested among other things the memory with memtest86+. This runs fine for 4 passes, without any error. As far as I can tell, my memory subsystem is ok. Poking around in the OCZ forum for something I thought I recalled seeing somewhere before. I had seen reports that this board might be touchy about 1.65v memory. As far as the consensus goes with the small sampling I looked at, it seemed that 1.63 or 1.64 vdc was the sweet spot. Some claims are that it didn't want to work at anything either above or below this range. My RAM is OCZ3BE1600C8LV4GK (anything with BE or AM in the part number is designed specifically for AM3). I thought it was 1.5v, but since I didn't remember for certain I checked and it shows a spec for 1.65v. However, I rebooted so I could look at the CMOS/BIOS stuff and I have the System Voltage Control section set for AUTO for all. Then I looked in the PC Health Status page and on the DDR3 1.5V line it was only reading 1.600v. There seems to be a general feeling the newer AMD processors don't much care for higher memory voltages. Try lowering your voltages and see if it helps. I am successfully using this board with the CPU clock set at 240MHz, which with the x14 multiplier results in 3.36GHz operation. The Hypertransport and FSB bus speeds are 2400MHz and the memory is running at 1599MHz at the x6.66 multiplier. When I get the RAM up to 1680MHz is where I can get it to freeze. As long as I don't do that it is totally stable. -Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64: Fatal Trap 12 in high load situations
Am Saturday 06 February 2010 14:03:06 schrob David N: [snip] What power supply do you have? How many watts? brand? If you have insufficient power, it may cause the system to become unstable. Regards David N I tested with an Enermax EPR425AWT Pro82+ II, 425W wich was the psu I bought and intended to use with this computer. After stumbling across the instabilities I tested with a HEC 550TE-2WX 550W, but it made no difference, so either both are faulty / insufficient or the problem is something else. regards, Sven -- 00 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64: Fatal Trap 12 in high load situations
Am Saturday 06 February 2010 14:37:16 schrob Michael Powell: ms80 wrote: [snip] There seems to be a general feeling the newer AMD processors don't much care for higher memory voltages. Try lowering your voltages and see if it helps. I am successfully using this board with the CPU clock set at 240MHz, which with the x14 multiplier results in 3.36GHz operation. The Hypertransport and FSB bus speeds are 2400MHz and the memory is running at 1599MHz at the x6.66 multiplier. When I get the RAM up to 1680MHz is where I can get it to freeze. As long as I don't do that it is totally stable. -Mike My CPU is an AMD Phenom II X 4 905e. Its (default) settings are: CPU Clock Ratio (Auto) 2500MHz CPU Northbridge Freq. (Auto) 2000MHz CPU Host Clock Contr. (Auto) HT Link Width (Auto) HT Link Freq. (Auto) 2000MHz Memory Clock(x6.66 ) 1333MHz I set the DDR3 voltage to auto, now it shows about 1.58V. Testing will take a little bit. Thank you for the hint. regards, Sven -- 00 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64: Fatal Trap 12 in high load situations
Am Saturday 06 February 2010 10:17:05 schrob ms80: Hi I have a problem installing / upgrading FreeBSD 8.0-release on a new machine. The computers specs are: cpu: AMD Phenom II X4 board: Gigabyte MA790GPT-UD3H ram: 4x2GBytes DDR3/1333 hdd: 2xMaxtor STM31000528AS nic: 4x Intel(R) PRO/1000 and I'm running FreeBSD phenom2.localnet 8.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE #0: Sat Nov 21 15:02:08 UTC 2009 r...@mason.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 During 'make buildworld' the machine regulary crashes with the following panic: Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode cpuid = 0; apic id = 00 fault virtual adress = 0x8 fault code= supervisor write data, page not present instruction pointer = 0x20:0x80578591 stack pointer = 0x28:0xff80eab94700 frame pointer = 0x28:0xff80eab94720 code segment = base 0x0, limit 0xf, type 0x1b = DPL 0, pres 1, long 1, def32 0, gran 1 processor eflags = interrupt enabled, resume IOPL = 0 current process = 22039 (uudecode) trap number = 12 panic: pagefault cpuid = 0 Uptime: 2h35m4s Physical memory: 8176 MB Dumping 2195 MB: 2180 2164 2148 2132 2116 or this one, its from last night and the machine wrote a minidump before locking up: Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode cpuid = 0; apic id = 00 fault virtual address = 0x8 fault code= supervisor write data, page not present instruction pointer = 0x20:0x80578591 stack pointer = 0x28:0xff80eab21500 frame pointer = 0x28:0xff80eab21520 code segment = base 0x0, limit 0xf, type 0x1b = DPL 0, pres 1, long 1, def32 0, gran 1 processor eflags = interrupt enabled, resume, IOPL = 0 current process = 5238 (objcopy) trap number = 12 panic: page fault cpuid = 0 Uptime: 1h15m45s Physical memory: 8176 MB Dumping 2148 MB: 2133 2117 2101 2085 2069 2053 2037 2021 2005 1989 1973 1957 1941 1925 1909 1893 1877 1861 1845 1829 1813 1797 1781 1765 1749 1733 1717 1701 1685 1669 1653 1637 1621 1605 1589 1573 1557 1541 1525 1509 1493 1477 1461 1445 1429 1413 1397 1381 1365 1349 1333 1317 1301 1285 1269 1253 1237 1221 1205 1189 1173 1157 1141 1125 1109 1093 1077 1061 1045 1029 1013 997 981 965 949 933 917 901 885 869 853 837 821 805 789 773 757 741 725 709 693 677 661 645 629 613 597 581 565 549 533 517 501 485 469 453 437 421 405 389 373 357 341 325 309 293 277 261 245 229 213 197 181 165 149 133 117 101 85 69 53 37 21 5 [snip] I know, its kind of stupid to reply to my own mails, but for reference: I edited loader.conf to contain ahci_load=YES So far it works: The machine compiled all night and didn't crash. I had the idea because yesterday while testing the proposal to lower the ddr3 voltages, the machine crashed again. Additionally to the panic I'm already used to, I had a second panic in my core.txt.1: This was a fatal trap 1, referencing (current process) to irq 22. I checked what irq22 is and it is my atapci (ATI IXP700/800 SATA300 controller). Googling a bit around I found a tutorial how to activate ahci. I gave it a try and as said above: So far it seems to work. regards Sven -- 00 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64: building lib32 with ccache ?
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:57:17 +0100 Frank Staals franksta...@gmx.net wrote: Hey everyone, Yesterday I wanted to update my system currently running 8.0-RC1 amd64 to the latest 8-STABLE release. However buildworld failed. I found out the problem seems to pop up when trying to build the lib32 libraries. If I build lib32 without ccache everything on itself everything seems to go fine. However when using ccache, even with a clean cache, the build fails. ... Can anyone point out what could go wrong ? Am I even 'allowed' to build lib32 with ccache on ? People have reported buildworld problems before with the ccache/amd64/32-bit combination. I'd suggest looking back through the list. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64
On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 04:27:54 -0800 (PST) Clayton Wilhelm da Rosa claytonwilhel...@yahoo.com.br wrote: Hi, i made the download of FreeBSD amd64 and i wanna know if the amd64 is the same as x86_x64. Yes, it's the same. amd64, x86_64 and x64 are all the same architecture. -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64 native ports?
On Thursday 06 August 2009 10:19:47 Robert Huff wrote: Somewhere in *.freebsd.org is a page that lists which ports run natively on amd64 and what the status is for the others. I've seen it, I have it bookmarked in a place that is currently unavailable, and I can't find it by hand. Anyone have the URL handy? There's always the build logs on pointyhat: http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/ And some reports here: http://portsmon.freebsd.org/index.html Not sure which of those is exactly what you're looking for though. HTH, JN ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64 native ports?
On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 10:19:47AM -0400, Robert Huff wrote:
Somewhere in *.freebsd.org is a page that lists which ports run
natively on amd64 and what the status is for the others. I've seen it,
I have it bookmarked in a place that is currently unavailable, and I
can't find it by hand. Anyone have the URL handy?
This will show you the ports marked IGNORE:
http://www.freshports.org/ports-ignore.php
This will detect and use your browsers architecture to find ports you
cannot use. Mind you, it can be IGNOREd for other reasons than your
current architecture)
I tend to look at ONLY_FOR ARCHS statements in port makefiles:
find /usr/ports/ -type f -name Makefile -exec grep -H 'ONLY_FOR_ARCHS' {} \;
Any port that doesn't have one of those should run on every
architecture. But I doubt is this info is complete for rare
architectures as ia64 or sparc. It should be OK for amd64, because
that's relatively common.
Roland
--
R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/
[plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated]
pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725)
pgptBAnUEu9kp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: amd64 native ports?
John Nielsen wrote: There's always the build logs on pointyhat: http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/ And some reports here: http://portsmon.freebsd.org/index.html These are not the droids I'm looking for. As I remember the page, it has three columns: the port name, the (color-coded) status, and a description of work needed. (There might be another column with relevant PRs or something.). Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: amd64 and sysinstall weirdness
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Len Conrad lcon...@go2france.com wrote: Dell PE 1950 FreeBSD 7.2 amd64 boot from disc01 into sysinstall, do our regular setup, reboot, and df shows only / and /devfs. f stab has /usr and /var missing. so we go into sysinstall, slices are correct: Disk name: mfid0 FDISK Partition Editor DISK Geometry: 17688 cyls/255 heads/63 sectors = 284157720 sectors (138748MB) Offset Size(ST)End Name PType Desc Subtype Flags 0 63 62- 12 unused0 63 10474317 10474379 mfid0s1 8freebsd 165 104743804192965 14667344 mfid0s2 8freebsd 165 14667345 10474380 25141724 mfid0s3 8freebsd 165 25141725 259015995 284157719 mfid0s4 8freebsd 165 284157720 6376 284164095- 12 unused0 but labels: FreeBSD Disklabel Editor Disk: mfid0 Partition name: mfid0s1 Free: 0 blocks (0MB) Disk: mfid0 Partition name: mfid0s2 Free: 0 blocks (0MB) Disk: mfid0 Partition name: mfid0s3 Free: 10474380 blocks (5114MB) Disk: mfid0 Partition name: mfid0s4 Free: 259015995 blocks (123GB) Part Mount Size Newfs Part Mount Size Newfs - - - - ufsid/4a72noneb432c4 5114MB * mfid0s2b swap 2047MB SWAP .. the /usr and /var mount points were lost. fstab: cat /etc/fstab # DeviceMountpoint FStype Options Dump Pass# /dev/mfid0s2b noneswapsw 0 0 /dev/ufsid/4a72bbc67db432c4a/ ufs rw 1 1 /dev/acd0 /cdrom cd9660 ro,noauto 0 0 we saw the /var and /usr filesystems were really there, so we added to fstab: /dev/mfid0s3/usrufs rw 2 2 /dev/mfid0s4/varufs rw 2 2 and rebooted, all seems ok. We went through this drill twice, and got the same results. /var/run/dmesg: mfid0: MFI Logical Disk on mfi0 mfid0: 138752MB (284164096 sectors) RAID volume '' is optimal SMP: AP CPU #1 Launched! SMP: AP CPU #2 Launched! SMP: AP CPU #3 Launched! GEOM_LABEL: Label for provider mfid0s1 is ufsid/4a72bbc67db432c4. GEOM_LABEL: Label for provider mfid0s3 is ufsid/4a72bbc60412e6dd. GEOM_LABEL: Label for provider mfid0s4 is ufsid/4a72bbc6e3898627. Trying to mount root from ufs:/dev/ufsid/4a72bbc67db432c4a GEOM_LABEL: Label ufsid/4a72bbc60412e6dd removed. GEOM_LABEL: Label for provider mfid0s3 is ufsid/4a72bbc60412e6dd. GEOM_LABEL: Label ufsid/4a72bbc6e3898627 removed. GEOM_LABEL: Label for provider mfid0s4 is ufsid/4a72bbc6e3898627. GEOM_LABEL: Label ufsid/4a72bbc60412e6dd removed. GEOM_LABEL: Label ufsid/4a72bbc6e3898627 removed. Anybody know why the sysintall labels and fstab aren't showing up the way we set them up in sysinstall? thanks Len Looks like you may getting slices and partitions confused. Generally your partitions are subsets of slices eg: ad0s1a ad0s1b ad0s1c ad0s1d ad0s1f Where as your output is something like this: ad0s1 ad0s2 ad0s3 ad0s4 Unless you have some pressing reason to do otherwise, choose the Auto settings they are sufficient for most purposes. -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: AMD64 VM with OpenGL?
On 2009-06-30 02:13:11, Roland Smith wrote: The page says it does. Forgive me for being cynical but after countless experiences, I rarely believe such statements any more! Virtualbox + VMGL seems the most likely candidate at the moment - From the abovementioned page: VMGL is available for X11-based guest OS's. I'm just not sure if it's currently stable at all. At version 0.1.1, I wouldn't expect too much. OpenGL is just a display mechanism. If the calculations feeding the display have to be run in an emulator, this will slow your program down considerably. Well, I'd be running with virtualization extensions as my CPU supports them and I'd think that OpenGL commands being passed from a VM straight to the graphics card via this system shouldn't incur too much overhead. If your program on the guest OS is already written for X11, can't you port it to FreeBSD? Or run it natively and transport the output to your FreeBSD box via X11? If I'd written the program, it'd already be running on FreeBSD natively, you've got my word on that. Unfortunately it's old and, of course, proprietary. xw ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: AMD64 VM with OpenGL?
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 08:14:17PM +0100, xorquew...@googlemail.com wrote: Hello. What's the preferred virtual machine on FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE on amd64 if OpenGL support is required? Depends on what your definitions of a virtual machine and OpenGl support are. :-) All CPU level virtual machines (like bochs, qemu, virtualbox) can run emulated OpenGL in their guest operating systems. If you are asking if there is a virtual machine that passes OpenGL calls directly to the hosts' OpenGL system, the only things that come to mind are: - FreeBSD jails - the Wine MS Windows emulator. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpZTBFlaepDn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: AMD64 VM with OpenGL?
On 2009-06-29 23:34:08, Roland Smith wrote: On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 08:14:17PM +0100, xorquew...@googlemail.com wrote: Hello. What's the preferred virtual machine on FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE on amd64 if OpenGL support is required? Depends on what your definitions of a virtual machine and OpenGl support are. :-) Yeah, probably should have mentioned that! I actually meant the definition you gave: a VM with native OpenGL acceleration. I wonder if the virtualbox port to FreeBSD is likely to be able to use this at all: http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~andreslc/xen-gl/ Virtualbox + VMGL seems the most likely candidate at the moment - I'm just not sure if it's currently stable at all. xw ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: AMD64 VM with OpenGL?
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:59:04PM +0100, xorquew...@googlemail.com wrote: On 2009-06-29 23:34:08, Roland Smith wrote: On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 08:14:17PM +0100, xorquew...@googlemail.com wrote: Hello. What's the preferred virtual machine on FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE on amd64 if OpenGL support is required? Depends on what your definitions of a virtual machine and OpenGl support are. :-) Yeah, probably should have mentioned that! I actually meant the definition you gave: a VM with native OpenGL acceleration. I wonder if the virtualbox port to FreeBSD is likely to be able to use this at all: http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~andreslc/xen-gl/ The page says it does. Virtualbox + VMGL seems the most likely candidate at the moment - From the abovementioned page: VMGL is available for X11-based guest OS's. I'm just not sure if it's currently stable at all. At version 0.1.1, I wouldn't expect too much. OpenGL is just a display mechanism. If the calculations feeding the display have to be run in an emulator, this will slow your program down considerably. If your program on the guest OS is already written for X11, can't you port it to FreeBSD? Or run it natively and transport the output to your FreeBSD box via X11? Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgppF6ZurAyjQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: amd64 ?!
kalin m wrote: hi all... i have dilemma. i asked a hosting faclity to set up freebsd 7 on new server. and i mentioned that it should be 64 bit. now they when i get into the machine i get: srv391# uname -a FreeBSD srv391.carpathiahost.com 7.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #0: Sun Feb 24 10:35:36 UTC 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 i did ask for an intel machine and the dmseg actually states: CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5405 @ 2.00GHz (1997.01-MHz K8-class CPU) Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0x10676 Stepping = 6 Features=0xbfebfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM,PBE Features2=0xce33dSSE3,RSVD2,MON,DS_CPL,VMX,TM2,SSSE3,CX16,xTPR,PDCM,DCA,b19 AMD Features=0x20100800SYSCALL,NX,LM AMD Features2=0x1LAHF so i'm a bit confused about the the 64 bit and why the machine is identifying itself as amd64 and not i686? amd64 is the architecture name (since it was invented by AMD; just like i686 is named after Intel even if you are running CPU implementations by amd, cyrix, etc). Kris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 ?!
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 04:56:26PM -0400, kalin m wrote: hi all... i have dilemma. i asked a hosting faclity to set up freebsd 7 on new server. and i mentioned that it should be 64 bit. now they when i get into the machine i get: srv391# uname -a FreeBSD srv391.carpathiahost.com 7.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #0: Sun Feb 24 10:35:36 UTC 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 i did ask for an intel machine and the dmseg actually states: CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5405 @ 2.00GHz (1997.01-MHz K8-class CPU) Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0x10676 Stepping = 6 AMD Features=0x20100800SYSCALL,NX,LM AMD Features2=0x1LAHF so i'm a bit confused about the the 64 bit and why the machine is identifying itself as amd64 and not i686? Well, amd64 is the name FreeBSD uses for the 64-bit architecture built by AMD as en extension of the 32-bit x86 architecture. Intel later made it's chips compatible because it's own 64-bit architecture IA64 was more or less a dud. This architecture is also known as x86_64. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpVYYF9Bt7j7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: amd64 ?!
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 04:56:26PM -0400, kalin m wrote: hi all... i have dilemma. i asked a hosting faclity to set up freebsd 7 on new server. and i mentioned that it should be 64 bit. now they when i get into the machine i get: srv391# uname -a FreeBSD srv391.carpathiahost.com 7.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE #0: Sun Feb 24 10:35:36 UTC 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 i did ask for an intel machine and the dmseg actually states: CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5405 @ 2.00GHz (1997.01-MHz K8-class CPU) Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0x10676 Stepping = 6 Features=0xbfebfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM,PBE Features2=0xce33dSSE3,RSVD2,MON,DS_CPL,VMX,TM2,SSSE3,CX16,xTPR,PDCM,DCA,b19 AMD Features=0x20100800SYSCALL,NX,LM AMD Features2=0x1LAHF so i'm a bit confused about the the 64 bit and why the machine is identifying itself as amd64 and not i686? Looks fine to me. It is obviously the amd64 version of FreeBSD (which is 64-bit), which works just fine on that Intel CPU since all Intel's recent CPUs implement the AMD64 (aka x86-64) architecture. Intel calls it EM64T (unless they have changed it again) instead of AMD64, but it is the same thing. -- Insert your favourite quote here. Erik Trulsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 ?!
so i'm a bit confused about the the 64 bit and why the machine is identifying itself as amd64 and not i686? because this intel CPU is 64-bit AMD compatible (x86-64 standard). the rules changed and now intel make AMD-compatible CPUs ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 ?!
I think maybe what he was expecting was a FreeBSD IA64 install on the box, but they installed AMD64 instead On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 4:48 AM, Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: so i'm a bit confused about the the 64 bit and why the machine is identifying itself as amd64 and not i686? because this intel CPU is 64-bit AMD compatible (x86-64 standard). the rules changed and now intel make AMD-compatible CPUs ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 ?!
Outback Dingo wrote: I think maybe what he was expecting was a FreeBSD IA64 install on the box, but they installed AMD64 instead *Correctly* installed. Kris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 07:35:34 + Colin Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 06/03/2008, RW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Everything I've every seen about this suggests that amd64 is faster on a few applications, such as mp3 encoding, but generally there is very little difference, on average, across desktop applications. Do you have any measurements to support that 20% figure. I do on Linux (if that is relevant - I'm not clear if the question is FreeBSD specific or not): See http://colina.demon.co.uk/?q=node/53 but your binary also grows to 5 times the size of the 32-bit version, it doesn't seem, in any sense, to be a typical desktop application. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
Em Wednesday 05 March 2008 02:36:33 Isaac Mushinsky escreveu: I have new hardware (Abit ip35-pro, Intel Q6600), and was contemplating installing FreeBSD/arch, but now realise that I am going to have some problems. My nvidia card will not be of much use (GeForce 8500GT), since nvidia-drivers are not there for amd64, and the open source nv driver does not even support XVideo extension for these cards. I can downgrade to a nv 7xxx series card, which works better with the open driver. I do not mind loss of 3D support, but would need basic things like mplayer. So my questions are: 1. Should I get nvidia 7xxx or an ATI card? Which card is most likely to work reasonably well? No fancy features required, but may be appreciated later. I prefer ATI ones, like r300, in which works out-of-the-box with the opensource xf86-video-ati. 2. Any problems with flash plugin (flash7 for now, I do not mean the confounded flash9 headache)? flash7 through nspluginwrapper works fine with firefox compiled by ports. flash9 is working through windows firefox (via wine). 3. Other casual desktop user problems I should be aware of? 4. Is it worth it? Perhaps I should stay with i386, but it is a pity not to be able to use the new machine to its full potential. With amd64 you'll not get wine, VESA, boot splash screen and maybe more stuff. Even googleearth I couldn't make it work in amd64. So I think it's not a good idea to use amd64 as a desktop. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Aline de Freitas - Chave pública: ID DE632016 / keys.indymedia.org gpg --keyserver keys.indymedia.org --recv-keys DE632016 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:36:33AM -0500, Isaac Mushinsky wrote: I have new hardware (Abit ip35-pro, Intel Q6600), and was contemplating installing FreeBSD/arch, but now realise that I am going to have some problems. My nvidia card will not be of much use (GeForce 8500GT), since nvidia-drivers are not there for amd64, and the open source nv driver does not even support XVideo extension for these cards. I can downgrade to a nv 7xxx series card, which works better with the open driver. I do not mind loss of 3D support, but would need basic things like mplayer. Any ATI card up to and including the 9250 (rv280) is fully supported on amd64, 3D and all. (I know because I've got one :-) 2. Any problems with flash plugin (flash7 for now, I do not mean the confounded flash9 headache)? I've never been able to get a native flash player to work, but I don't mind doing without. The downloadhelper plugin for firefox can help you download a lot of movies (e.g. youtube) which you then can play with mplayer. All the flash ads I'll gladly do without. 3. Other casual desktop user problems I should be aware of? Wine is i386 only. 4. Is it worth it? Perhaps I should stay with i386, but it is a pity not to be able to use the new machine to its full potential. Practically you don't _need_ amd64 unless you're running out of address space on i386. Me, I'm running amd64 because I can. :-) My desktop has a gig of RAM, and I seldom use more than half of that. Mind you, I'm using a simple window manager not a desktop environment with lots of bells whistles. I suspect binaries on i386 will be somewhat smaller. But amd64 has more registers which might give some speed advantages. I haven't tested it, but it might be nice to do a speed comparison between i386 and amd64 on identical hardware. I don't think the difference will matter for a common desktop though; the CPU of a desktop is mostly idling anyway. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpwQRIUaqgOM.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:13:03 +0100, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:36:33AM -0500, Isaac Mushinsky wrote: I have new hardware (Abit ip35-pro, Intel Q6600), and was contemplating installing FreeBSD/arch, but now realise that I am going to have some problems. My nvidia card will not be of much use (GeForce 8500GT), since nvidia-drivers are not there for amd64, and the open source nv driver does not even support XVideo extension for these cards. I can downgrade to a nv 7xxx series card, which works better with the open driver. I do not mind loss of 3D support, but would need basic things like mplayer. Any ATI card up to and including the 9250 (rv280) is fully supported on amd64, 3D and all. (I know because I've got one :-) Oh, is that so? Could you please tell me how you got it to work? Because I've got GREAT issues getting *ANY* ATI card to work with at least Composite on FreeBSD and/or Linux. And I've even got i386. Or has something happened since I last cried myself to sleep over this driverless hell? -- Sincerely, Rada ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
On 3/5/08, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:36:33AM -0500, Isaac Mushinsky wrote: I have new hardware (Abit ip35-pro, Intel Q6600), and was contemplating installing FreeBSD/arch, but now realise that I am going to have some problems. My nvidia card will not be of much use (GeForce 8500GT), since nvidia-drivers are not there for amd64, and the open source nv driver does not even support XVideo extension for these cards. I can downgrade to a nv 7xxx series card, which works better with the open driver. I do not mind loss of 3D support, but would need basic things like mplayer. Any ATI card up to and including the 9250 (rv280) is fully supported on amd64, 3D and all. (I know because I've got one :-) 2. Any problems with flash plugin (flash7 for now, I do not mean the confounded flash9 headache)? I've never been able to get a native flash player to work, but I don't mind doing without. The downloadhelper plugin for firefox can help you download a lot of movies (e.g. youtube) which you then can play with mplayer. All the flash ads I'll gladly do without. 3. Other casual desktop user problems I should be aware of? Wine is i386 only. 4. Is it worth it? Perhaps I should stay with i386, but it is a pity not to be able to use the new machine to its full potential. Practically you don't _need_ amd64 unless you're running out of address space on i386. Me, I'm running amd64 because I can. :-) My desktop has a gig of RAM, and I seldom use more than half of that. Mind you, I'm using a simple window manager not a desktop environment with lots of bells whistles. I suspect binaries on i386 will be somewhat smaller. But amd64 has more registers which might give some speed advantages. I haven't tested it, but it might be nice to do a speed comparison between i386 and amd64 on identical hardware. I don't think the difference will matter for a common desktop though; the CPU of a desktop is mostly idling anyway. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ersmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) Thanks a lot. Trouble is, new hardware does not even have an AGP slot for those cards. I don't mind to go without 3D, though, and it appears some newer cards (R5xx/R6xx) have decent drivers otherwise. Yes, I also want to go amd64 because I can. Besides, it will be a fresh install, and if ever, this is the right time to switch. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
of RAM, and I seldom use more than half of that. Mind you, I'm using a simple window manager not a desktop environment with lots of bells whistles. I suspect binaries on i386 will be somewhat smaller. But amd64 has more registers which might give some speed advantages. I haven't tested it, but yes it is much faster (somehow like 20%), and code size are rarely big part of memory usage. data size may be a problem if program uses huge tables with pointers, like squid. i always use amd64 on amd64-capable hardware, with exception of i386 squid binary which doesn't use much CPU but lots of RAM, and a bit less with i386 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 06:29:51PM +0100, alive wrote: Any ATI card up to and including the 9250 (rv280) is fully supported on amd64, 3D and all. (I know because I've got one :-) Oh, is that so? Could you please tell me how you got it to work? Because I've got GREAT issues getting *ANY* ATI card to work with at least Composite on FreeBSD and/or Linux. And I've even got i386. Or has something happened since I last cried myself to sleep over this driverless hell? - Add the device radeondrm to you kernel config and recompile, or load the radeon.ko kernel module. - Install the xf86-video-ati driver (this is xorg 7.3!) - Load the right modules in xorg.conf; Section Module Loaddri Loadglx Loaddbe Loadextmod Loadfreetype Loadtype1 EndSection - Use the radeon driver in xorg.conf: Section Device Identifier Card0 Driver radeon #Option AGPMode 8 #Option DDCMode true EndSection That's about it, I think. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpMMKGsfsW4F.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
On 3/5/08, Isaac Mushinsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/5/08, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:36:33AM -0500, Isaac Mushinsky wrote: I have new hardware (Abit ip35-pro, Intel Q6600), and was contemplating installing FreeBSD/arch, but now realise that I am going to have some problems. My nvidia card will not be of much use (GeForce 8500GT), since nvidia-drivers are not there for amd64, and the open source nv driver does not even support XVideo extension for these cards. I can downgrade to a nv 7xxx series card, which works better with the open driver. I do not mind loss of 3D support, but would need basic things like mplayer. Any ATI card up to and including the 9250 (rv280) is fully supported on amd64, 3D and all. (I know because I've got one :-) [...] Thanks a lot. Trouble is, new hardware does not even have an AGP slot for those cards. I don't mind to go without 3D, though, and it appears some newer cards (R5xx/R6xx) have decent drivers otherwise. Yes, I also want to go amd64 because I can. Besides, it will be a fresh install, and if ever, this is the right time to switch. Where can I get a decent driver for ATI chipsets (e.g. RG516)? The radeonhd driver does not support hardware acceleration, and so far it doesn't work properly with my brain-dead RG516 card (which tells radeonhd that there are no monitors connected), leaving me with the vesa driver, which is pretty limiting but at least is better than nothing. Although this was planned to be an amd64 system, I'm forced to use i386 because the HP BIOS won't boot FreeBSD amd64 (I will never voluntarily have anything to do with another HP system after my experience with this one). My nVidia-based system works (although not as well as it did with older nVidia drivers), but it is an older card on an i386 system. I don't know what happens with newer nVidia chipsets. - Bob ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
Thanks. Do you by any chance have a link to supported cards? Do you know if this driver supports Composite? OpenGL? On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 20:32:06 +0100, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 06:29:51PM +0100, alive wrote: Any ATI card up to and including the 9250 (rv280) is fully supported on amd64, 3D and all. (I know because I've got one :-) Oh, is that so? Could you please tell me how you got it to work? Because I've got GREAT issues getting *ANY* ATI card to work with at least Composite on FreeBSD and/or Linux. And I've even got i386. Or has something happened since I last cried myself to sleep over this driverless hell? - Add the device radeondrm to you kernel config and recompile, or load the radeon.ko kernel module. - Install the xf86-video-ati driver (this is xorg 7.3!) - Load the right modules in xorg.conf; Section Module Loaddri Loadglx Loaddbe Loadextmod Loadfreetype Loadtype1 EndSection - Use the radeon driver in xorg.conf: Section Device Identifier Card0 Driver radeon #Option AGPMode 8 #Option DDCMode true EndSection That's about it, I think. Roland -- Sincerely, Rada ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 09:22:35PM +0100, alive wrote: Thanks. Do you by any chance have a link to supported cards? http://www.sapphiretech.com/us/products/products_overview.php?gpid=59grp=2 Support for r300 based cards is coming as well. Do you know if this driver supports Composite? OpenGL? It works with OpenGL. I haven't tried composite. On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 20:32:06 +0100, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 06:29:51PM +0100, alive wrote: Any ATI card up to and including the 9250 (rv280) is fully supported on amd64, 3D and all. (I know because I've got one :-) Oh, is that so? Could you please tell me how you got it to work? Because I've got GREAT issues getting *ANY* ATI card to work with at least Composite on FreeBSD and/or Linux. And I've even got i386. Or has something happened since I last cried myself to sleep over this driverless hell? - Add the device radeondrm to you kernel config and recompile, or load the radeon.ko kernel module. - Install the xf86-video-ati driver (this is xorg 7.3!) - Load the right modules in xorg.conf; Section Module Loaddri Loadglx Loaddbe Loadextmod Loadfreetype Loadtype1 EndSection - Use the radeon driver in xorg.conf: Section Device Identifier Card0 Driver radeon #Option AGPMode 8 #Option DDCMode true EndSection That's about it, I think. You'll also need to install the dri port for direct rendering to work. And you'll need this in xorg.conf: Section DRI Mode 0666 EndSection Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpfltJUznuHH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, alive wrote: On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:13:03 +0100, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:36:33AM -0500, Isaac Mushinsky wrote: I have new hardware (Abit ip35-pro, Intel Q6600), and was contemplating installing FreeBSD/arch, but now realise that I am going to have some problems. My nvidia card will not be of much use (GeForce 8500GT), since nvidia-drivers are not there for amd64, and the open source nv driver does not even support XVideo extension for these cards. I can downgrade to a nv 7xxx series card, which works better with the open driver. I do not mind loss of 3D support, but would need basic things like mplayer. Any ATI card up to and including the 9250 (rv280) is fully supported on amd64, 3D and all. (I know because I've got one :-) Oh, is that so? Could you please tell me how you got it to work? Because I've got GREAT issues getting *ANY* ATI card to work with at least Composite on FreeBSD and/or Linux. And I've even got i386. Or has something happened since I last cried myself to sleep over this driverless hell? -- Sincerely, Rada I own a Radeon 9600 pro and with the xf86-video-ati from git tree I can get 3D and even tv-out through xrandr. I believe that that the new 6.8.0 (which still is not in the ports tree) We'll gona be able to have everything (3D, tv-out) out-of-the-box in the same way as the git one. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
Thanks everyone, based on the info I am returning the nvidia card and getting an R4xx instead (found an X850 for under $80 still sold; seems to be well enough supported). I still want to try amd64; other limitations do not bother me that much (I do not care for wine or win32 codecs). ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 19:47:53 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: of RAM, and I seldom use more than half of that. Mind you, I'm using a simple window manager not a desktop environment with lots of bells whistles. I suspect binaries on i386 will be somewhat smaller. But amd64 has more registers which might give some speed advantages. I haven't tested it, but yes it is much faster (somehow like 20%), and code size are rarely big part of memory usage. Everything I've every seen about this suggests that amd64 is faster on a few applications, such as mp3 encoding, but generally there is very little difference, on average, across desktop applications. Do you have any measurements to support that 20% figure. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 or i386 for desktop use?
On 06/03/2008, RW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Everything I've every seen about this suggests that amd64 is faster on a few applications, such as mp3 encoding, but generally there is very little difference, on average, across desktop applications. Do you have any measurements to support that 20% figure. I do on Linux (if that is relevant - I'm not clear if the question is FreeBSD specific or not): See http://colina.demon.co.uk/?q=node/53 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 kernel installed on i386 machine?
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:08:31 -0500 David T [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am worried that I installed the 64 bit version of FreeBSD with an amd kernel on an Intel i386 box. Is there something wrong when I see the following: Intel produce CPUs that are compatible with amd64. If yours wasn't one of these you wouldn't have got this far. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 kernel installed on i386 machine?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /usr/local]# uname -aFreeBSD web1.machine.net 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #0: Sun Jan 6 22:37:33 CST 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/web1 amd64 you did all right. you installed 64-bit kernel on 64-bit capable machine. amd64 is just a standard for 64-bit extension of x86, not AMD processors. i run FreeBSD/amd64 on core2 duo for example ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 native boot loader?
snowcrash+freebsd wrote: hi, i've FBSD/amd64 62Rp9 installed. kernel world are my own builds from latest cvsup. on boot I see: FreeBSD/i386 bootstrap loader odd. i'd expect a native loader ... checking in, /usr/src/sys/boot ls Makefile alpha/arm/ efi/ forth/ia64/ pc98/ sparc64/ READMEarc/ common/ ficl/ i386/ ofw/ powerpc/ other arches seem to be there ... just not amd64. where's the src for the amd64? AMD64 CPUs are backwards compatible with i386; they boot in 16-bit real mode and only get switched into 64-bit 'long mode' by the kernel later on. Since both i386 and amd64 start booting in the same way, there's no need for separate bootloaders. -- Bruce ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 native boot loader?
On Dec 22, 2007, at 3:32 AM, Bruce Cran wrote: AMD64 CPUs are backwards compatible with i386; they boot in 16-bit real mode and only get switched into 64-bit 'long mode' by the kernel later on. Since both i386 and amd64 start booting in the same way, there's no need for separate bootloaders. -- Bruce I've thought about this too, but do wonder why the boot loader couldn't go into long mode in one of the loader stages. I don't know if there'd be any significant improvements or drawbacks other than duplication of some code(which I imagine isn't changed often). Somewhat offhand, can the OpenBSD loader chain boot FreeBSD? Due to my dvd drive being sata over atapi, it wasn't recognized by the 6 branch until recently(many thanks to whoever committed the change). But I recall that the boot cd for FreeBSD wouldn't boot, but the boot cd for OpenBSD would. Of course that does primarily relate to cdboot and not boot0. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 HP SA6i RAID5 no boot
Brian wrote: Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Hi, What am I doing wrong? 7-Beta3 vanilla install from CD, I let sysinstall do automatic partitions and slices, then stops at F1 FreeBSD prompt and beeps. Obviously it cannot find anything to boot from. System is a SA6i RAID5-array with 6x300GB disks. Possibly I need to enter drive geometry manually but have no idea where to get that info from, perhaps somebody knows where to look? i386 does not boot either - same A RAID1+0 array with 4x36GB disks boots fine both amd64 and i386. Right. If I create two slices, one 50G and one 1.3T and use the first for /, /var etc. then the system will boot. I would assume from the above that I could perhaps use some other utility to create a big single slice. Is the 2TB max implied here still true? http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-August/095504.html Could be but I have *less* than 2TB... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 HP SA6i RAID5 no boot
7-Beta3 vanilla install from CD, I let sysinstall do automatic partitions and slices, then stops at F1 FreeBSD prompt and beeps. Obviously it cannot find anything to boot from. System is a SA6i RAID5-array with 6x300GB disks. Possibly I need to enter drive geometry manually but have no idea where to get that info from, perhaps somebody knows where to look? i386 does not boot either - same A RAID1+0 array with 4x36GB disks boots fine both amd64 and i386. Right. If I create two slices, one 50G and one 1.3T and use the first for /, /var etc. then the system will boot. I would assume from the above that I could perhaps use some other utility to create a big single slice. Is the 2TB max implied here still true? http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-August/095504.html Could be but I have *less* than 2TB... ___ I have a RAID-5 setup with 3 - 750GB drives. I was able to install, though I did get a couple of warnings in the setup screen about bad geometry (that I did nothing about). ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 HP SA6i RAID5 no boot
Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Hi, What am I doing wrong? 7-Beta3 vanilla install from CD, I let sysinstall do automatic partitions and slices, then stops at F1 FreeBSD prompt and beeps. Obviously it cannot find anything to boot from. System is a SA6i RAID5-array with 6x300GB disks. Possibly I need to enter drive geometry manually but have no idea where to get that info from, perhaps somebody knows where to look? i386 does not boot either - same A RAID1+0 array with 4x36GB disks boots fine both amd64 and i386. So the logical drive size is a problem? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 HP SA6i RAID5 no boot
Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Hi, What am I doing wrong? 7-Beta3 vanilla install from CD, I let sysinstall do automatic partitions and slices, then stops at F1 FreeBSD prompt and beeps. Obviously it cannot find anything to boot from. System is a SA6i RAID5-array with 6x300GB disks. Possibly I need to enter drive geometry manually but have no idea where to get that info from, perhaps somebody knows where to look? i386 does not boot either - same A RAID1+0 array with 4x36GB disks boots fine both amd64 and i386. Right. If I create two slices, one 50G and one 1.3T and use the first for /, /var etc. then the system will boot. I would assume from the above that I could perhaps use some other utility to create a big single slice. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is the 2TB max implied here still true? http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-August/095504.html brian ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 HP SA6i RAID5 no boot
Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Hi, What am I doing wrong? 7-Beta3 vanilla install from CD, I let sysinstall do automatic partitions and slices, then stops at F1 FreeBSD prompt and beeps. Obviously it cannot find anything to boot from. System is a SA6i RAID5-array with 6x300GB disks. Possibly I need to enter drive geometry manually but have no idea where to get that info from, perhaps somebody knows where to look? i386 does not boot either - same A RAID1+0 array with 4x36GB disks boots fine both amd64 and i386. Right. If I create two slices, one 50G and one 1.3T and use the first for /, /var etc. then the system will boot. I would assume from the above that I could perhaps use some other utility to create a big single slice. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 08:58:34AM -0400, Arend P. van der Veen wrote: Hi All, I have a general question. We have access to some new AMD64 based Dell Servers with 2 Core Duo Xeons. We are currently using i386 Dell Servers with a core duo processor. I recall from my MS Windows days that when there was the shift from 16-bit to 32-bit processors it did take a while for applications to support 32 bit. Sometimes 16-bit applications actually ran slower on the 32-bit hardware. I know this is a loaded question: - Will the AMD64 based FreeBSD 6.2 distribution with applications such as Postgresql, Apache, Python, Tomcat and SBCL be able to take advantage of the 64-bit quad processor? This is a very frequently asked question, so you might like to do a bit of research in the archives or on google. Kris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 vs i386
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 08:58:34AM -0400, Arend P. van der Veen wrote: - Will the AMD64 based FreeBSD 6.2 distribution with applications such as Postgresql, Apache, Python, Tomcat and SBCL be able to take advantage of the 64-bit quad processor? Yes, if you compile them natively on AMD64. Whether this results in speedups depends on a lot of factors. Instruction words on AMD64 are longer than i386, so binaries tend to be bigger, but on the other hand you've got more general purpose registers. The general consensus seems to be that you _need_ AMD64 if you routinely run out of address space. In other situations it can be nice to have, but it depends on the apps and the workload. I've been using an AMD64 system as my main desktop machine for years without problems. There are some ports that won't work, but that's mostly x86 binaries like the flash plugin and nvidia drivers. Both of which I can well live without. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpfMxLXAP3eR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: amd64 GENERIC fails to compile
On Tue, 29 May 2007 08:35:24 -0700 Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote: Hello All: We have a system that was built with the amd64 source (uname -a below). I was attempting to make a custom kernel and the make kept failing so I decided to try the make against GENERIC. It fails at the same place in GENERIC as the custom kernel. Here is the output. It's failing on the 3Ware driver and fails even if I comment out the TWA driver in the custom kernel. Try to add the following line to your /etc/make.conf: WITHOUT_MODULES=twa We have a kernel module loaded dynamically (twa96SE.ko) to support the 9650 RAID controller. Any help in making the make work would be greatly appreciated. FreeBSD f1-bsd01.adhost.lan 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #0: Fri Jan 12 08:32:24 UTC 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 === twa (all) cc -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -Werror -D_KERNEL -DKLD_MODULE -nostdinc -I- -I/usr/src/sys/modules/twa/../../dev/twa -DHAVE_KERNEL_OPTION_HEADERS -include /usr/src/sys/amd64/compile/GENERIC/opt_global.h -I. -I@ -I@/contrib/altq -I@/../include -finline-limit=8000 -fno-common -g -fno-omit-frame-pointer -I/usr/src/sys/amd64/compile/GENERIC -mcmodel=kernel -mno-red-zone -mfpmath=387 -mno-sse -mno-sse2 -mno-mmx -mno-3dnow -msoft-float -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -ffreestanding -Wall -Wredundant-decls -Wnested-externs -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wcast-qual -fformat-extensions -std=c99 -c /usr/src/sys/modules/twa/tw_cl_init.c /usr/src/sys/modules/twa/tw_cl_init.c: In function `tw_cl_ctlr_supported': /usr/src/sys/modules/twa/tw_cl_init.c:68: error: `TW_CL_DEVICE_ID_9K_E' undeclared (first use in this function) /usr/src/sys/modules/twa/tw_cl_init.c:68: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once /usr/src/sys/modules/twa/tw_cl_init.c:68: error: for each function it appears in.) /usr/src/sys/modules/twa/tw_cl_init.c: In function `tw_cl_get_pci_bar_info': /usr/src/sys/modules/twa/tw_cl_init.c:118: error: `TW_CL_DEVICE_ID_9K_E' undeclared (first use in this function) /usr/src/sys/modules/twa/tw_cl_init.c: In function `tw_cl_init_ctlr': /usr/src/sys/modules/twa/tw_cl_init.c:335: error: `TW_CL_DEVICE_ID_9K_E' undeclared (first use in this function) *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src/sys/modules/twa. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src/sys/modules. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src/sys/amd64/compile/GENERIC. WBR -- Boris Samorodov (bsam) Research Engineer, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone Internet SP FreeBSD committer, http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 FreeBSD Release 5.5 - 6.2
On Fri, 18 May 2007 13:31:52 + (UTC) Duane Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 18 May 2007, RW wrote: On Thu, 17 May 2007 10:39:35 + (UTC) Duane Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 17 May 2007, Matthew Seaman wrote: You should be able to upgrade the system by a routine buildworld, buildkernel ... type operation, but beware that you will need to recompile all of your ports because of potential shlib version clashes. Ports from 5.5 will still work on 6.2, but later trying to update them piecemeal can lead to misery. I'm using portupgrade. So I will use the switches force a reinstall and to act on everything that depends on the reinstalled port (-fr). That wont do anything useful as there is nothing for the -r to work with after a base-system upgrade. The best way to upgrade all ports with portupgrade is to do it by datestamp like this: portupgrade -f '2007-05-18 14:00' What about: portupgrade -afR Wouldn't that force everything including ports that depend on the one being reinstalled? If you use the datestamp instead of -a, you can stop and start the build. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 FreeBSD Release 5.5 - 6.2
On Thu, 17 May 2007 10:39:35 + (UTC) Duane Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 17 May 2007, Matthew Seaman wrote: You should be able to upgrade the system by a routine buildworld, buildkernel ... type operation, but beware that you will need to recompile all of your ports because of potential shlib version clashes. Ports from 5.5 will still work on 6.2, but later trying to update them piecemeal can lead to misery. I'm using portupgrade. So I will use the switches force a reinstall and to act on everything that depends on the reinstalled port (-fr). That wont do anything useful as there is nothing for the -r to work with after a base-system upgrade. The best way to upgrade all ports with portupgrade is to do it by datestamp like this: portupgrade -f '2007-05-18 14:00' ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 FreeBSD Release 5.5 - 6.2
On Fri, 18 May 2007, RW wrote: On Thu, 17 May 2007 10:39:35 + (UTC) Duane Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 17 May 2007, Matthew Seaman wrote: You should be able to upgrade the system by a routine buildworld, buildkernel ... type operation, but beware that you will need to recompile all of your ports because of potential shlib version clashes. Ports from 5.5 will still work on 6.2, but later trying to update them piecemeal can lead to misery. I'm using portupgrade. So I will use the switches force a reinstall and to act on everything that depends on the reinstalled port (-fr). That wont do anything useful as there is nothing for the -r to work with after a base-system upgrade. The best way to upgrade all ports with portupgrade is to do it by datestamp like this: portupgrade -f '2007-05-18 14:00' What about: portupgrade -afR Wouldn't that force everything including ports that depend on the one being reinstalled? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 FreeBSD Release 5.5 - 6.2
On Fri, 18 May 2007 13:31:52 + (UTC) Duane Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What about: portupgrade -afR Wouldn't that force everything including ports that depend on the one being reinstalled? If you wanted, you could use: portmanager -u -l -f That will update and rebuild your entire existing ports system. Be prepared, it could take awhile depending upon what you have installed. -- Gerard Next time you see someone acting stupid ... consider the possibility it might be the real thing. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: amd64 FreeBSD Release 5.5 - 6.2
On Fri, 18 May 2007, Gerard Seibert wrote: On Fri, 18 May 2007 13:31:52 + (UTC) Duane Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What about: portupgrade -afR Wouldn't that force everything including ports that depend on the one being reinstalled? If you wanted, you could use: portmanager -u -l -f That will update and rebuild your entire existing ports system. Be prepared, it could take awhile depending upon what you have installed. Thanks for the alternate method. There are 138 ports installed. At least that's the number reported back from 'pkg_info | wc -l'. I'm speculating it will take less than four hours. The server has four processors and lots of memory. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 FreeBSD Release 5.5 - 6.2
Duane Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What about: portupgrade -afR Wouldn't that force everything including ports that depend on the one being reinstalled? I can't parse your question, but I think you are confusing the 'R' option with the 'r' option. You should also note that both options are redundant if -a is also specified. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 FreeBSD Release 5.5 - 6.2
On Thu, 17 May 2007, Matthew Seaman wrote: Duane Hill wrote: I have a server that, at first, required 5.5 because of the MTA that was running on the server. It no longer is running that particular MTA anymore. I need to upgrade the server to release 6.2. Is it just a matter of changing the release tag within the cvsup file from RELENG_5_5 to RELENG_6_2, removing the contents of /usr/src/*, removing the contents of /usr/obj/*, and doing a clean cvsup? Pretty much. You don't actually need to delete /usr/src/*, and not doing so will save you some bandwidth. You should be able to upgrade the system by a routine buildworld, buildkernel ... type operation, but beware that you will need to recompile all of your ports because of potential shlib version clashes. Ports from 5.5 will still work on 6.2, but later trying to update them piecemeal can lead to misery. I'm using portupgrade. So I will use the switches force a reinstall and to act on everything that depends on the reinstalled port (-fr). ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 FreeBSD Release 5.5 - 6.2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Duane Hill wrote: I have a server that, at first, required 5.5 because of the MTA that was running on the server. It no longer is running that particular MTA anymore. I need to upgrade the server to release 6.2. Is it just a matter of changing the release tag within the cvsup file from RELENG_5_5 to RELENG_6_2, removing the contents of /usr/src/*, removing the contents of /usr/obj/*, and doing a clean cvsup? Pretty much. You don't actually need to delete /usr/src/*, and not doing so will save you some bandwidth. You should be able to upgrade the system by a routine buildworld, buildkernel ... type operation, but beware that you will need to recompile all of your ports because of potential shlib version clashes. Ports from 5.5 will still work on 6.2, but later trying to update them piecemeal can lead to misery. Cheers, Matthew - -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.3 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGS84Z8Mjk52CukIwRCAXiAKCNzKK5NoHsCKwUBpwb2exXBxALOwCcCPFJ 8c6FJamMM6+TAM5d9itSPz0= =THxJ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64
In response to Michael S [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am getting my (first) Athlon 64 x 2 today or tomorrow and was wondering whether I should stick with the reliable x86 or try the AMD64 port. Any performance penalties when running x86 FreeBSD on a 64-bit machine? Performance is equivalent, except in a few corner cases. Keep in mind that there are some cases where amd64 is actually slower, so it's really a wash, unless you know you're specific application will benefit from 64 bit. Also what are the common problems, i.e. drivers, applications that are known not to work under the AMD64. This is going to be a desktop/workstation type system. Personally, I would stick with i386, unless you like to experiment. Last time I tried to run amd64 on a desktop, I had lots of trouble with misc problems here and there. Same machine running i386 is rock stable with no problems. My gut tells me that a lot of desktop apps and libraries aren't really mature from a 64-bit standpoint yet. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64
On Wednesday 18 April 2007 21:30:14 Michael S wrote: Good day all. I am getting my (first) Athlon 64 x 2 today or tomorrow and was wondering whether I should stick with the reliable x86 or try the AMD64 port. I'd try it but ... Any performance penalties when running x86 FreeBSD on a 64-bit machine? ... for some things it may ... Also what are the common problems, i.e. drivers, applications that are known not to work under the AMD64. This is going to be a desktop/workstation type system. ... there are quite a few 3rd party things that don't work or that need kludgy 32bits emulation. Flash comes to mind, also (MS/Real/..) media codecs. All the stuff we love to hate. Most importantly though, you can't use nvidia driver (32bit). I have a spare amd64 box with a nvidia based board (ASUS SLI something with the graphics card in a PCI Express slot, gforce4 IIRC) and I found I could only use plain (xorg) nv driver, and had to disable any hardware acceleration. Else it would just reboot randomly. I only use this machine to test kbtv on amd64. Moving the TV window around or resizing it is painfully slow (the video itself is OK but it eats a lot more CPU with non accelerated x rendering, up to 10%). Needless to say the machine is turned off most of the time... So I think what matters is whether these things matter to you :) I don't think the base system is any faster or slower. But it depends on what you're going to use it for. HTH, Dan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 04:41:46PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote: In response to Michael S [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am getting my (first) Athlon 64 x 2 today or tomorrow and was wondering whether I should stick with the reliable x86 or try the AMD64 port. Any performance penalties when running x86 FreeBSD on a 64-bit machine? Performance is equivalent, except in a few corner cases. Keep in mind that there are some cases where amd64 is actually slower, so it's really a wash, unless you know you're specific application will benefit from 64 bit. Also what are the common problems, i.e. drivers, applications that are known not to work under the AMD64. This is going to be a desktop/workstation type system. Personally, I would stick with i386, unless you like to experiment. Last time I tried to run amd64 on a desktop, I had lots of trouble with misc problems here and there. Same machine running i386 is rock stable with no problems. My gut tells me that a lot of desktop apps and libraries aren't really mature from a 64-bit standpoint yet. I've been running amd64 on my desktop since 5.3 without any real problems. But I only picked hardware that had drivers available. Some things to keep in mind: 1) no binary nvidia graphics driver 2) no flash plugin 3) java is cumbersome. 4) no win32 codecs for mplayer ad 1) I've got a Radeon 9250 that's supported by the native Xorg DRI driver, so no problem. I don't like binary-only drivers anyway. ad 2) So no annoying flash ads either. :-) I can live with that. ad 3) I don't use it anyway. ad 4) Works fine without them, AFAICT. Stuff like emacs, firefox, gimp, sane, imagemagick, audacious and mplayer all work fine. I haven't tried openoffice, bacause it's huge with lots of dependencies and I prefer LaTeX anyway. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpiWg5CqrcS6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: AMD64
Hi, FreeBSD 6.x AMD64 runs for more than a year on my 'AMD Athlon 3000+' now. It runs very stable with one exception: accessing ext2/ext3 filesystems often hang the system completely. That is a phenomenon that I did not see with FreeBSD 6.x x86. Apart from that I am very happy with it. Regards, Cor On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 15:30:14 -0400 (EDT) Michael S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good day all. I am getting my (first) Athlon 64 x 2 today or tomorrow and was wondering whether I should stick with the reliable x86 or try the AMD64 port. Any performance penalties when running x86 FreeBSD on a 64-bit machine? Also what are the common problems, i.e. drivers, applications that are known not to work under the AMD64. This is going to be a desktop/workstation type system. Thanks in advance, Michael ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 12:23:41AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, FreeBSD 6.x AMD64 runs for more than a year on my 'AMD Athlon 3000+' now. It runs very stable with one exception: accessing ext2/ext3 filesystems often hang the system completely. That is a phenomenon that I did not see with FreeBSD 6.x x86. Which PR is this documented in? Kris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 -current iso laying around? or How to make a LiveCD from scratch?
So, in an effort to get my system up and running I was wondering if someone could provide me with either a link to a v7 ISO available somewhere, or directions on how to make a FreeBSD LiveCD (I have 2 other IA32 systems kicking around I can use for building stuff :)..). There are 7.0-CURRENT snapshots available on ftp.freebsd.org, for example: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/snapshots/200703/7.0-CURRENT-200703-amd64-disc1.iso Josh ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 -current iso laying around? or How to make a LiveCD from scratch?
In the last episode (Mar 10), Garrett Cooper said: Just bought and built a new PC, comes with an Conroe-based Core 2 Duo, Realtek 8169 Gigabit chipset, JbMicron PATA / SATA RAID controller, and the like. Now, I can boot up the FreeBSD livecd perfectly fine, but when it comes to adding the interface the driver isn't present (although it is available if one compiles the kernel with the proper driver), and if I do install the system it fails to properly detect the root devices at boot (something to do with the RAID setup or numbering drives I believe). So, in an effort to get my system up and running I was wondering if someone could provide me with either a link to a v7 ISO available somewhere, or directions on how to make a FreeBSD LiveCD (I have 2 other IA32 systems kicking around I can use for building stuff :)..). CDs for current are available at ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/snapshots/ ; pick the latest dated subdirectory. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 -current iso laying around? or How to make a LiveCD from scratch?
On Mar 10, 2007, at 11:11 PM, Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Mar 10), Garrett Cooper said: Just bought and built a new PC, comes with an Conroe-based Core 2 Duo, Realtek 8169 Gigabit chipset, JbMicron PATA / SATA RAID controller, and the like. Now, I can boot up the FreeBSD livecd perfectly fine, but when it comes to adding the interface the driver isn't present (although it is available if one compiles the kernel with the proper driver), and if I do install the system it fails to properly detect the root devices at boot (something to do with the RAID setup or numbering drives I believe). So, in an effort to get my system up and running I was wondering if someone could provide me with either a link to a v7 ISO available somewhere, or directions on how to make a FreeBSD LiveCD (I have 2 other IA32 systems kicking around I can use for building stuff :)..). CDs for current are available at ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/snapshots/ ; pick the latest dated subdirectory. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Oh nice! Thanks (both of you) guys! -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 + FreeBSD 6.1 + Keyboard troubles
Coen Watstaatervoor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've installed FreeBSD 6.1 on a new Dual AMD Opeteron HE server, during the installation the keyboard works fine. But when you plug in the keyboard after a reboot (without the keyboard attached) the keyboard won't work any more. I'm doing the same installation on a Dual Intel Xeon machine and the keyboard works fine after a reboot and a cold plug in. Could this be a motherboard problem or is this something within BSD? If it's a PS/2 keyboard, then you're not supposed to do that anyway, and it's a hardware issue. If it's a USB keyboard, a newer version of FreeBSD might do better. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Stability with 6.1+?
On 9/5/06, Thomas T. Veldhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anybody on this list indicate what kind of stability they have seen with AMD64 systems using FreeBSD (the 64-bit binaries)? How about the majority of PORTS in the tree? I realize this question will solicit relatively subjective responses, but I am interested in them all. Excellent. In fact we use www/squid on amd64 and due to its specifics it works even better than on i386. I've seen a few other programs experience a small, but pleasant perfomance boost just because of the i386=amd64 move. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Stability with 6.1+?
On Tuesday 05 September 2006 14:09, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
Can anybody on this list indicate what kind of stability they have seen
with AMD64 systems using FreeBSD (the 64-bit binaries)? How about the
majority of PORTS in the tree?
The problems with amd64 are more to do with whether the port works at all:
find /usr/ports/ -name Makefile -exec grep ONLY_FOR_ARCHS {} + | grep -v
amd64
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Stability with 6.1+?
On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 08:09:27AM -0500, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote: Can anybody on this list indicate what kind of stability they have seen with AMD64 systems using FreeBSD (the 64-bit binaries)? How about the majority of PORTS in the tree? Stability of amd64 is excellent. # uptime 7:45AM up 104 days, 7:39, 2 users, load averages: 8.10, 7.61, 7.06 # uname -r 6.1-RELEASE That's one of the machines that I use for the official package builds, it's been building 8 packages concurrently for the past 104 days (which was the last time I rebooted it to update the kernel). Kris pgpO2J8msw50F.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: AMD64 Stability with 6.1+?
I experience instability with FreeBSD-AMD64 using ext2/ext3 filesystems. Sometimes reading and writing these filesystems work without any problems and the next time the whole system hangs with the only option resetting the pc. Nevertheless I use it because overall it seems to be a lot faster, but I stay away from the mentioned filesystems. Cor On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 08:09:27 -0500 Thomas T. Veldhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anybody on this list indicate what kind of stability they have seen with AMD64 systems using FreeBSD (the 64-bit binaries)? How about the majority of PORTS in the tree? I realize this question will solicit relatively subjective responses, but I am interested in them all. Thanks in advance, Tom Veldhouse ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Stability with 6.1+?
I experience instability with FreeBSD-AMD64 using ext2/ext3 filesystems. Sometimes reading and writing these filesystems work without any problems and the next time the whole system hangs with the only option resetting the pc. Nevertheless I use it because overall it seems to be a lot faster, but I stay away from the mentioned filesystems. Cor On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 08:09:27 -0500 Thomas T. Veldhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anybody on this list indicate what kind of stability they have seen with AMD64 systems using FreeBSD (the 64-bit binaries)? How about the majority of PORTS in the tree? I realize this question will solicit relatively subjective responses, but I am interested in them all. Thanks in advance, Tom Veldhouse ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Stability with 6.1+?
On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 06:54:44PM +0200, Cor van Wandelen wrote: I experience instability with FreeBSD-AMD64 using ext2/ext3 filesystems. Sometimes reading and writing these filesystems work without any problems and the next time the whole system hangs with the only option resetting the pc. Nevertheless I use it because overall it seems to be a lot faster, but I stay away from the mentioned filesystems. Have you submitted a PR? Make sure to follow the directions in the chapter on kernel debugging in the developers handbook. Kris pgpZlfL53MxL9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: AMD64 make buildworld failure
On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 08:26:54PM -0400, stan wrote: I'm trying to do a buildworld (AMD64) on a Sum Ultra 40, but it's failing like this: cc -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -DRRESTORE -DRESCUE -c /usr/src/sbin/restore /restore.c cc -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -DRRESTORE -DRESCUE -c /usr/src/sbin/restore /dirs.c /usr/src/sbin/restore/dirs.c: In function `extractdirs': /usr/src/sbin/restore/dirs.c:192: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault: 1 1 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src/sbin/restore. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/obj/usr/src/rescue/rescue. *** Error code 1 This is installed from the 6.1 Release CD, and then cvsup'd Can anyone tell me where I should start looking. That URL, or the FreeBSD FAQ. Kris pgpwSZkdw3gvv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: AMD64 Desktop Support
Michael Collette wrote: I don't have any bias towards either company. My focus is spending my money on what will actually work. Starting to feel like I'll be looking at the Pentium-D processors. I've got a laptop with a dual core Pentium and it works pretty sweet. AMD 64bit processors work just fine in i386 mode and dollar for dollar will outperform Intel and run cooler and use less power. There is no need to discount AMD just because you don't want to run 64 bit version. No, I don't work for AMD, I just recognise a better product. ducks for cover --Alex, my 2 pence ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Desktop Support
On Wednesday 21 June 2006 01:42, Michael Collette wrote: Andy Reitz wrote: In 64-bit mode, that does appear to be the case. However, it sounds like you could purchase an AMD64-based processor, and have everythign work fine in 32-bit mode. Then later down the road, as the software evolves, you could upgrade FreeBSD to be 64-bit and be set. Just a thought, I was thinking along those lines as well, but then the money starts to kick in. The dual core Pentium is a much lower price than the dual AMD64. By the time the software is truly ready to go 64-bit, I think I'd be better off buying a system at that point. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that 64-bit is going to be superfast, most people report very little difference in speed, except in a limited number of applications, some people say that it's actually slower. The real reason for 64-bit is support for address spaces that span more than 4GB. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Desktop Support
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: You can always run the 32bit i386 version on the AMD motherboard if you find out that the above stuff doesn't work so well. I don't use FreeBSD as a desktop so I cannot comment on that part but amd64 issues with flash etc does not mean you have to buy a P4 or other Intel chip based system. Not really anything against Intel here, just thought that the AMD might be worth looking at. Just so much of what is available for purchase for either platform seems to have issues with hardware support. Thanks for the feedback just the same. -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. - Yogi Berra ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Desktop Support
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006, at 22:35:15 -0700, Michael Collette wrote: Bit of a dilemma here with my primary desktop machine suddenly up and dieing on me. I'm now in the market to slap together a new PC I've started with looking at picking up an AMD64 based system. After Googling around for a while I still have some concerns I haven't been able to address. Probably just not looking the right places. Mostly I'm worried about some of the proprietary stuff like Flash, Acrobat, nVidia Drivers, Java, and the like not working. Is anyone out there actively using the AMD64 processor as a desktop machine? Are any of these 32-bit apps going to prove to be a show stopper for me? The alternative appears to be the P4 with all the motherboards I've seen using audio devices that aren't supported. Still, I'd rather buy an old sound card and have all the software at least functional. Any advice out there? Thanks, Hi. I'm using an Athlon64 3000+ (and the amd64 version of FreeBSD) as my main workstation. I also have another workstation with the same CPU running the i386 version. Here's my opinions: Flash - The 32 bit Linux binary of Flash 7 works in linux-firefox or linux-opera fine in i386 or amd64. The 32 bit Linux version of Flash 6 works somewhat with linuxpluginwrapper and the native Firefox on the i386 version of FreeBSD, although I've found it to be somewhat unstable and crashed quite a bit. There's also a project Gnash that is an open source Flash player, but I have not tried that one yet. Acrobat - The Linux binary of Acrobat 7 works for sure in the i386 version of FreeBSD. I have not tested it on my amd64 one (I just use xpdf), but the port's Makefile says it works and I don't see why it would have a problem. nVidia Drivers - Work great in the i386 version of FreeBSD. Does not work on the amd64 version yet ( http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=41545 ). Java - Got it to work on i386 version of FreeBSD (interfacing with browser not attempted, just for OpenOffice), but have not needed to or attempted on my amd64 box. I'm not sure if it's even possible for amd64 or not (as the Makefile I looked at shows only for i386), but someone else will know. For my purposes, there really isn't much that the amd64 version cannot do that the i386 version can. I would like the nVidia driver to work since I have a decent video card, but the Flash and Java I don't really care about much anymore. I use the native Firefox compiled from ports for my browsing and just fire up linux-opera whenever I need to see a Flash site. Me personally, I prefer AMD hardware over Intel and would get the Athlon64 regardless of if I run in i386 or amd64 mode FreeBSD. However, be sure to check your AMD64 hardware against the compatibility list before buying. I had to buy a replacement motherboard real quickly one day after one failed and I didn't fully check out the list before buying. When I got it, it turns out the onboard NIC and sound didn't work with FreeBSD in i386 or amd64 mode. I already had a NIC and sound card ready to go from the previous machine, but now both PCI slots on the Micro-ATX motherboard are taken and unfortunately I can't put in a SCSI card. The amd64 motherboard list is here. Note that amd64 in this case means the hardware itself and not the OS version, so if it's not listed here then the i386 version probably will not work either with that hardware (I found that out the hard way): http://www.freebsd.org/platforms/amd64/motherboards.html For sound cards, I have found the Sound Blaster stuff to work well with FreeBSD so far. I'm running an Augidy 2 Platinum in my main machine and it works better than on Windows (had tons of skipping problems that never could be solved -- thought it was a bad card but moving to FreeBSD eliminated them). The cheaper SB LIVE cards work too, and some of my machines have onboard which work great also. Hope that helps. :) -Mark -- Internet Radio: Party107 (Trance/Electronic) - http://www.party107.com Rock 101.9 The Edge (Rock) - http://www.rock1019.net IRC: MIXXnet IRC Network - irc.mixxnet.net (Nick: MIXX941) GnuPG Public Key: http://www.mkproductions.org/mk_pubkey.asc ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Desktop Support
Mark Kane wrote: Hi. I'm using an Athlon64 3000+ (and the amd64 version of FreeBSD) as my main workstation. I also have another workstation with the same CPU running the i386 version. Here's my opinions: Flash - The 32 bit Linux binary of Flash 7 works in linux-firefox or linux-opera fine in i386 or amd64. The 32 bit Linux version of Flash 6 works somewhat with linuxpluginwrapper and the native Firefox on the i386 version of FreeBSD, although I've found it to be somewhat unstable and crashed quite a bit. There's also a project Gnash that is an open source Flash player, but I have not tried that one yet. Acrobat - The Linux binary of Acrobat 7 works for sure in the i386 version of FreeBSD. I have not tested it on my amd64 one (I just use xpdf), but the port's Makefile says it works and I don't see why it would have a problem. nVidia Drivers - Work great in the i386 version of FreeBSD. Does not work on the amd64 version yet ( http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=41545 ). Java - Got it to work on i386 version of FreeBSD (interfacing with browser not attempted, just for OpenOffice), but have not needed to or attempted on my amd64 box. I'm not sure if it's even possible for amd64 or not (as the Makefile I looked at shows only for i386), but someone else will know. For my purposes, there really isn't much that the amd64 version cannot do that the i386 version can. I would like the nVidia driver to work since I have a decent video card, but the Flash and Java I don't really care about much anymore. I use the native Firefox compiled from ports for my browsing and just fire up linux-opera whenever I need to see a Flash site. Unfortunately, those items are pretty important to me. Kind of the point of the mail. I appreciate the feedback, and I am aware of some of the work arounds you mentioned. I use JEdit daily, as well as a couple of other Java apps. The nVidia driver thing stinks too. I had that running on my PC before the crash, and really liked it. Me personally, I prefer AMD hardware over Intel and would get the Athlon64 regardless of if I run in i386 or amd64 mode FreeBSD. I don't have any bias towards either company. My focus is spending my money on what will actually work. Starting to feel like I'll be looking at the Pentium-D processors. I've got a laptop with a dual core Pentium and it works pretty sweet. However, be sure to check your AMD64 hardware against the compatibility list before buying. I had to buy a replacement motherboard real quickly one day after one failed and I didn't fully check out the list before buying. When I got it, it turns out the onboard NIC and sound didn't work with FreeBSD in i386 or amd64 mode. I already had a NIC and sound card ready to go from the previous machine, but now both PCI slots on the Micro-ATX motherboard are taken and unfortunately I can't put in a SCSI card. I've been looking over spec pages like crazy for various motherboards, with particular attention on network and audio. The amd64 motherboard list is here. Note that amd64 in this case means the hardware itself and not the OS version, so if it's not listed here then the i386 version probably will not work either with that hardware (I found that out the hard way): http://www.freebsd.org/platforms/amd64/motherboards.html For sound cards, I have found the Sound Blaster stuff to work well with FreeBSD so far. I'm running an Augidy 2 Platinum in my main machine and it works better than on Windows (had tons of skipping problems that never could be solved -- thought it was a bad card but moving to FreeBSD eliminated them). The cheaper SB LIVE cards work too, and some of my machines have onboard which work great also. Hope that helps. :) Any and all feedback is appreciated. For as nice as the AMD64 processor may be, sounds like things are a ways off before the software has fully caught up. Thanks, -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. - Yogi Berra ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Desktop Support
On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, Michael Collette wrote: Any and all feedback is appreciated. For as nice as the AMD64 processor may be, sounds like things are a ways off before the software has fully caught up. In 64-bit mode, that does appear to be the case. However, it sounds like you could purchase an AMD64-based processor, and have everythign work fine in 32-bit mode. Then later down the road, as the software evolves, you could upgrade FreeBSD to be 64-bit and be set. Just a thought, -Andy. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Desktop Support
Andy Reitz wrote: In 64-bit mode, that does appear to be the case. However, it sounds like you could purchase an AMD64-based processor, and have everythign work fine in 32-bit mode. Then later down the road, as the software evolves, you could upgrade FreeBSD to be 64-bit and be set. Just a thought, I was thinking along those lines as well, but then the money starts to kick in. The dual core Pentium is a much lower price than the dual AMD64. By the time the software is truly ready to go 64-bit, I think I'd be better off buying a system at that point. Maybe they'll be selling quads by then :) Later on, -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. - Yogi Berra ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Desktop Support
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 22:35:15 -0700 Michael Collette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bit of a dilemma here with my primary desktop machine suddenly up and dieing on me. I'm now in the market to slap together a new PC I've started with looking at picking up an AMD64 based system. After Googling around for a while I still have some concerns I haven't been able to address. Probably just not looking the right places. Mostly I'm worried about some of the proprietary stuff like Flash, Acrobat, nVidia Drivers, Java, and the like not working. Is anyone out there actively using the AMD64 processor as a desktop machine? Are any of these 32-bit apps going to prove to be a show stopper for me? The alternative appears to be the P4 with all the motherboards I've seen using audio devices that aren't supported. Still, I'd rather buy an old sound card and have all the software at least functional. Any advice out there? Thanks, I tried the AMD64 version some time ago. Unfortunately I have to use Win'XP sometimes and an ext2 filesystem with the right Windows driver enables me to share files between XP and FreeBSD. For me 'Problem Report amd64/69704 : ext2/ext3 unstable in amd64' was the reason to switch back to the 32 bits version of FreeBSD again as it locked up every time I wrote or read a ext2 filesystem. Cor ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD64 Desktop Support
On Jun 19, 2006, at 11:35 PM, Michael Collette wrote: Bit of a dilemma here with my primary desktop machine suddenly up and dieing on me. I'm now in the market to slap together a new PC I've started with looking at picking up an AMD64 based system. After Googling around for a while I still have some concerns I haven't been able to address. Probably just not looking the right places. Mostly I'm worried about some of the proprietary stuff like Flash, Acrobat, nVidia Drivers, Java, and the like not working. Is anyone out there actively using the AMD64 processor as a desktop machine? Are any of these 32-bit apps going to prove to be a show stopper for me? The alternative appears to be the P4 with all the motherboards I've seen using audio devices that aren't supported. Still, I'd rather buy an old sound card and have all the software at least functional. Any advice out there? You can always run the 32bit i386 version on the AMD motherboard if you find out that the above stuff doesn't work so well. I don't use FreeBSD as a desktop so I cannot comment on that part but amd64 issues with flash etc does not mean you have to buy a P4 or other Intel chip based system. Chad --- Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC Your Web App and Email hosting provider chad at shire.net ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 FreeBSD 6.0 problem
On May 22, 2006, at 10:46 AM, YTResearch wrote: Please let me know if this is not the right list to ask this. I have a Tyan 4882 4 CPU (dual core) Opteron, running amd64 FreeBSD 6.0 Release, 8 gig ram (all recognized), SCSI 15K Seagate ST373454LC drives. BIOS is running all stock settings. Cool, would like to have one of those It's job is to run Apache (ran 2.1 now latest 2.2, have tried threaded and prefork configurations). It runs blisteringly fast and appears to have no problems except one. It hangs after running 5 to 7 days, once after 2 days. There are no error messages in the log and it just stops responding. The only solution is to physically go press the reset button where as it recovers perfectly every time (after fixing the messed up any messed up file system links). The system is a very high traffic web server. It services html pages and trivial Perl CGI forum software running without any particular privilege. Prior to a hurried installation, I ran a high volume bench mark against it on my own lan hitting it with 10K of requests for a trivial web page look up and did produce a hang but the person needing the system really needed it that day. Because of that I've tried two versions of Apache and various MPMs all with the same result. I think Apache may be a red herring in this. I also discovered that it's running off an UPS rated lower than it's power requirements though only under extreme conditions, the UPS is being replaced this week. The hang seems too consistent to be power but perhaps not. apache probably has nothing to do with this. Apache shouldn't be able to freeze the machine. That sort of thing happens with marginal power, heat issues, HW issues (RAM etc)... Chad I would like to know if anyone has heard of such an issue with amd64 6.0 Release and what debugging processes might have been used to get around it. I have dmesg and more *stat information if that would help. Thank you in advance, Chris --- Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC Your Web App and Email hosting provider chad at shire.net ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
