On 7/9/07, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... x86_64, not x86-64 ...
> http://kerneltrap.org/node/2466
> I give up. But I still like x86_64 better.
They're synonymous. The underscore variant exists because some
software likes that better, as you noted. The same idea exists in
plen
On Jul 9, 2007, at 17:44, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> There are good reasons for _ instead of -, from a programming
> standpoint.
Heh, that's funny, I hadn't thought of that. We could just call the
architecture '70' and be obtuse about it.
-Bill
-
Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.44
On 7/9/07, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I find the use of 'amd64' for package arch in debian/ubuntu/derivatives...
> well, dumb and confusing for end-users who don't know any better (as
> evidenced by the existence of this thread).
Blame Intel. Intel *insisted*, *at length*, *loudl
On 7/9/07, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I seem to recall amd64 being called x86_64 originally. Intel's implementation
> was then announced as x86-64. (note the _ vs. the - ). After that, AMD went
> with amd64 to differentiate more.
Yah, I believe AMD started out calling it x86-64.
On Monday 09 July 2007 14:46:22 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> -- Original message --
> From: Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > > The jist is, it used to be x86-64, then it was amd64, but x86_64 is
> > > still used. Now doesn't that just clear everything up? :-)
>
On Monday 09 July 2007 14:56:51 Chip Marshall wrote:
> On 7/9/07, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ...only that seems in correct, from my recollection. I seem to recall
> > amd64 being called x86_64 originally. Intel's implementation was then
> > announced as x86-64. (note the _ vs. the
-- Original message --
From: Paul Lussier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I just found these:
>
> $ apt-cache search em64
>
> kernel-image-2.6-em64t-p4 - Linux kernel image for version 2.6 on \
> Intel EM64T systems - transition package
> kernel
On 7/9/07, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...only that seems in correct, from my recollection. I seem to recall amd64
> being called x86_64 originally. Intel's implementation was then announced as
> x86-64. (note the _ vs. the - ). After that, AMD went with amd64 to
> differentiate more.
-- Original message --
From: Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > The jist is, it used to be x86-64, then it was amd64, but x86_64 is still
> > used. Now doesn't that just clear everything up? :-)
>
> ...only that seems in correct, from my recollection. I seem to
On Monday 09 July 2007 14:22:27 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> -- Original message --
> From: Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > I find the use of 'amd64' for package arch in
> > debian/ubuntu/derivatives... well, dumb and confusing for end-users who
> > don't know
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> It may be unified with options in the kernel config. I was looking
> through the package archives, and I'm not seeing any kernels listed
> as em64. I see plenty that are amd64, though. I'm downloading the
> kernel source now to see what the configuration options are.
I
-- Original message --
From: Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > amd64 = em64 = x86-64[1], I believe it's generally referred to as amd64
> > because AMD beat Intel to market with a widely used x86 compatible 64-bit
> > CPU.
> >
> > [1] for certain values of "="
Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I find the use of 'amd64' for package arch in debian/ubuntu/derivatives...
> well, dumb and confusing for end-users who don't know any better (as
> evidenced by the existence of this thread).
And evidently even for those (like me :) who *should*!
Oy..
On 7/9/07, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I find the use of 'amd64' for package arch in debian/ubuntu/derivatives...
> well, dumb and confusing for end-users who don't know any better (as
> evidenced by the existence of this thread).
> I presume Debian jumped on building 64-bit packages
that chipset.
> >
> > Hint: AMD does not make the Xeon ;)
> >iaXX stands for Intel Architecture where the XX is number of
> > bits...
>
> As I understand it, the Intel Xeon 64 bit CPUs are EM64T, not IA64. The
> only IA64 CPU I know of is the Itanium. An
te:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Do I need the ia64, the amd64, or something else?
>
> Well, who makes the Xeon? I'd go with the kernel for that chipset.
>
> Hint: AMD does not make the Xeon ;)
>iaXX stands for Intel Architecture where the XX is number of
bits
stands for Intel Architecture where the XX is number of bits...
As I understand it, the Intel Xeon 64 bit CPUs are EM64T, not IA64. The
only IA64 CPU I know of is the Itanium. An AMD64 kernel should be appropriate
on an EM64 machine. To the best of my knowledge, an IA64 kernel won't work
at a
On 7/9/07, Paul Lussier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I have a bunch of fairly high-end servers, all with dual dual-core
> > Xeon processors. Xeon's are supposed to be 64-bit processors, but
> > they are all running i386 kernels. I want to download the
> > appropriate D
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I have a bunch of fairly high-end servers, all with dual dual-core
> Xeon processors. Xeon's are supposed to be 64-bit processors, but
> they are all running i386 kernels. I want to download the
> appropriate Debian distribution for these boxes to enable 64-bit
> proces
On 7/9/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Thomas Charron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > They unified the em64 and amd64 *kernel*?
> > Last I'd checked, they use the amd64 distributions, but there where
> > different kernel optimizations between amd64 and em64 kernel options.
>
On 07/09/2007 12:07 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is good to know! I'm not concerned about the updating, since anything
> that is 32-bit will be packages that we build ourselves. It will make the
> conversion from 32-bit to 64-bit a bit easier if we run the existing 32-bit
> apps that we w
-- Original message --
From: Mark Komarinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> As others have said, you want the amd64 version. The kernels are
> unified now, so the same kernel will work on an amd64 or em64t system.
> Same as all other applications.
>
> If you have a ne
-- Original message --
From: "Thomas Charron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 7/9/07, Mark Komarinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As others have said, you want the amd64 version. The kernels are
> > unified now, so the same kernel will work on an amd64 or em64t system
On 07/09/2007 11:52 AM, Thomas Charron wrote:
> On 7/9/07, Mark Komarinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> As others have said, you want the amd64 version. The kernels are
>> unified now, so the same kernel will work on an amd64 or em64t system.
>> Same as all other applications.
>
> They unified t
On 7/9/07, Mark Komarinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As others have said, you want the amd64 version. The kernels are
> unified now, so the same kernel will work on an amd64 or em64t system.
> Same as all other applications.
They unified the em64 and amd64 *kernel*?
Last I'd checked, they
On 07/09/2007 11:14 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I have a bunch of fairly high-end servers, all with dual dual-core Xeon
> processors. Xeon's are supposed to be 64-bit processors, but they are all
> running i386 kernels. I want to download the appropriate Debian distribution
> for
On 7/9/07, Michael ODonnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64#Linux
Those links aren't really clear as to answer the question, tho. ;-)
--
-- Thomas
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing li
On 7/9/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi All,
> I have a bunch of fairly high-end servers, all with dual dual-core Xeon
> processors. Xeon's
> are supposed to be 64-bit processors, but they are all running i386 kernels.
> I want to
> download the appropriate Debian distributio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64#Linux
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Hi All,
I have a bunch of fairly high-end servers, all with dual dual-core Xeon
processors. Xeon's are supposed to be 64-bit processors, but they are all
running i386 kernels. I want to download the appropriate Debian distribution
for these boxes to enable 64-bit processing. Do I need the ia64,
30 matches
Mail list logo
