On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 12:54:27PM -0800, Yasha Karant wrote:
> ... Out of curiosity, how similar are the Apple Mac ARM CPUs to the CPU used
> in
> the Fujitsu Fugaku HPC machine (A64FX 48C 2.2GHz)?
Hard to tell. (easy to tell, "just read the specs")
The Intel "magic souce" was always the
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:54 PM Yasha Karant wrote:
> I knew persons using the X86 Mac compatibility layer on PPC Macs, and
> was told that there was a noticeable performance hit because the
> emulator (more or less) functioned as an "inner interpreter" for a
> totally different ISA. The same
I knew persons using the X86 Mac compatibility layer on PPC Macs, and
was told that there was a noticeable performance hit because the
emulator (more or less) functioned as an "inner interpreter" for a
totally different ISA. The same is true between X86-64 and the 64 bit
ARM ISAs (along with
>
> > ... Apple is leaving the X86-64 platform for an ARM platform. ...
>
> The recent releases of macOS went 64-bit only ...
> ... transitioned from PPC to x86.
> ... cut out a lot of old software
>
I have one leg in the MacOS world and I went through both transitions,
PPC to Intel and 32-bit
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:07 PM Yasha Karant wrote:
> For the Apple Mac community: as is known, Apple is leaving the X86-64
> platform for an ARM platform. Will older applications be updated, or
> will new (and in some cases, newly licensed-for-fee) applications be
> required?
>
The recent
I fully agree. The security-against-compromise integrity of up-ported
"SL7" using C++n, for some n > n(RHEL 7."latest or last" distro)
requires "professional" re-evaluation, penetration testing, and
monitoring. Will this be done? I too have run into the same issues
with backporting, and for
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 02:36:20PM -0500, Serguei Mokhov wrote:
> >
> > I have done this in the past with mixed success, typical problems
> > include "cmake is too old", "autoconf/autotools are too old".
>
> Having run into this at a smaller scale for one of the projects I ended up
> using
>
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:27 PM Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 05:36:30PM -0800, Keith Lofstrom wrote:
> For items (4) and (5), one has to take the current source code
> of the applications (and critical system services like httpd),
> and "back port" them to el7.
>
> I
On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 05:36:30PM -0800, Keith Lofstrom wrote:
> New distro releases imply:
>
> 1) security fixes,
> 2) bug fixes,
> 3) new hardware drivers,
> 4) new applications,
> 5) and changed behavior (ie, Gnome2 to Gnome3).
> (the list is probably not complete)
>
I think "SL7 forever"
I respectfully must slightly disagree with you.
In terms of security fixes and new hardware drivers, the issues of
backporting (that is, to make a bit of software compatible -- buildable
-- with the core gcc/g++ environment of a "very old" Linux, including
SL) may require a great deal of
New distro releases imply:
1) security fixes,
2) bug fixes,
3) new hardware drivers,
4) new applications,
5) and changed behavior (ie, Gnome2 to Gnome3).
(the list is probably not complete)
How much work (staff hours per year, plus volunteer help)
would it take to do JUST (1) and (2) for
11 matches
Mail list logo
