Re: amd64, 57600 serial install help

[Paul Macdonald]

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

[Ihsan Junaidi Ibrahim]

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

[Mark Felder]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 04:54:18 -0600, 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.




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

[Conrad J. Sabatier]

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 with 9.0 PRERELEASE freezing/hanging without any messages

[Reed Loefgren]

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 lib path locations

[Chuck Swiger]

On Jul 11, 2011, at 12:23 PM, wayne mitchell wrote:
> installing is fine (from package - not port)
> starting rosegarden from gui menu - nothing happens
> executing rosegarden from CLI returns error:
> [ /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: shared object "libQt3Support.so.4" not found,
> required by "rosegarden" ]
> 
> using 'find' to find the required object shows that it is on the system at:
> /usr/local/lib/qt4/libQt3Support.so.4

It's likely that setting $LD_LIBRARY_PATH to list /usr/local/lib/qt4, or 
running "ldconfig -m /usr/local/lib/qt4" will help...

Regards,
-- 
-Chuck

___
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

[Jerry McAllister]

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

[b. f.]

>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

[Depo Catcher]

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

[Robert Huff]

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

[Elias Chrysocheris]

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]

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:19:31 +0200, 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?

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 8.0 with zfs root and raidz ?

[Randal L. Schwartz]

> "Gene" == Gene   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
 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

[C. P. Ghost]

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Chad Perrin  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

[Chad Perrin]

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

[Ross Cameron]

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  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

[Chad Perrin]

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 won't install on Core Duo

[Tim Daneliuk]

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: Fatal Trap 12 in high load situations

[ms80]

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: Fatal Trap 12 in high load situations

[ms80]

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

[ms80]

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

[Michael Powell]

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

[David N]

On 6 February 2010 22:18, ms80  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]

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

[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]

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: building lib32 with ccache ?

[RW]

On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:57:17 +0100
Frank Staals  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

[Bruce Cran]

On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 04:27:54 -0800 (PST)
Clayton Wilhelm da Rosa  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?

[Robert Huff]

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 native ports?

[Roland Smith]

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]

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 and sysinstall weirdness

[Adam Vande More]

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Len Conrad  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/4a72b432c4 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:  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?

[xorquewasp]

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?

[Roland Smith]

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 VM with OpenGL?

[xorquewasp]

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?

[Roland Smith]

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 ?!

[Kris Kennaway]

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 ?!

[Outback Dingo]

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 ?!

[Wojciech Puchar]

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 ?!

[Erik Trulsson]

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=0xbfebfbff
>   
> Features2=0xce33d>
>   AMD Features=0x20100800
>   AMD Features2=0x1
> 
> 
> 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.






-- 

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 ?!

[Roland Smith]

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=0x20100800
>  AMD Features2=0x1
> 
> 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 ?!

[Kris Kennaway]

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=0xbfebfbff 

 
Features2=0xce33d> 


 AMD Features=0x20100800
 AMD Features2=0x1


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 or i386 for desktop use?

[RW]

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?

[Colin Adams]

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 or i386 for desktop use?

[RW]

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?

[Isaac Mushinsky]

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?

[aline]

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?

[Roland Smith]

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=59&grp=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"
> > Load"dri"
> > Load"glx"
> > Load"dbe"
> > Load"extmod"
> > Load"freetype"
> > Load"type1"
> > 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?

[alive]

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"
> Load"dri"
> Load"glx"
> Load"dbe"
> Load"extmod"
> Load"freetype"
> Load"type1"
> 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?

[Bob Johnson]

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?

[Roland Smith]

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"
Load"dri"
Load"glx"
Load"dbe"
Load"extmod"
Load"freetype"
Load"type1"
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?

[Wojciech Puchar]

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?

[Isaac Mushinsky]

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/
> [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?

[alive]

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?

[Roland Smith]

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?

[Aline de Freitas]

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 kernel installed on i386 machine?

[Wojciech Puchar]

[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 kernel installed on i386 machine?

[RW]

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 native boot loader?

[Joshua Isom]

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 native boot loader?

[Bruce Cran]

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 HP SA6i RAID5 no boot

[Derrick Ryalls]

> 
>  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]

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

[Brian]

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]

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 HP SA6i RAID5 no boot

[Per olof Ljungmark]

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 vs i386

[Roland Smith]

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 vs i386

[Kris Kennaway]

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 GENERIC fails to compile

[Boris Samorodov]

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

[RW]

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

[Lowell Gilbert]

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

[Duane Hill]

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

[Gerard Seibert]

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

[Duane Hill]

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

[RW]

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

[Duane Hill]

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

[Matthew Seaman]

-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

[Kris Kennaway]

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

[wanderingidea]

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

[Roland Smith]

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

[Danny Pansters]

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

[Bill Moran]

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 -current iso laying around?" or "How to make a LiveCD from scratch?"

[Garrett Cooper]

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 -current iso laying around?" or "How to make a LiveCD from scratch?"

[Dan Nelson]

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?"

[Josh Carroll]

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 + FreeBSD 6.1 + Keyboard troubles

[Lowell Gilbert]

"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+?

[Kris Kennaway]

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 Stability with 6.1+?

[Cor van Wandelen]

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+?

[Cor van Wandelen]

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+?

[Kris Kennaway]

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+?

[RW]

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+?

[Andrew Pantyukhin]

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 make buildworld failure

[Kris Kennaway]

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 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

[Alex Zbyslaw]

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.  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

[RW]

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

[Cor van Wandelen]

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

[Michael Collette]

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

[Andy Reitz]

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

[Michael Collette]

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

[Mark Kane]

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

[Michael Collette]

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

[Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC]

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]"