Re: [2.0] Plans for next beta version (1.9.18/1.9.19)

"Gilles Espinasse" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.security.ipcop.devel
Message-ID <02e101cbe67b$49cf0120$f9b5a8c0@pii350>
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harry Goldschmitt" <[email protected]>
To: "Gilles Espinasse" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 11:58 PM
Subject: Re: [IPCop-devel] [2.0] Plans for next beta version (1.9.18/1.9.19)


> On 3/7/11 11:02 PM, Gilles Espinasse wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Olaf Westrik"<weizen_42-Yz37vSk3/[email protected]>
> > To:<[email protected]>
> > Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: [IPCop-devel] [2.0] Plans for next beta version
(1.9.18/1.9.19)
> >
> >
> >> Let's try again ...
> >>
> >>
> >> I am fairly happy with the state we are in. Recent testresults look OK,
> >> some week ago I started to regularly build the testuites, results are
> >> here: http://ipcop-addons.ath.cx/ipcop/testresults/
> >>
> >> If nothing extremely important comes up, I would like to release the
> >> next beta version this month, somewhere around 27-30 March.
> >> Feel free to commit anything you have got till March 26th.
> >>
> >> Should there be any problems with the floppy install, I wil just make a
> >> note about that in the release notes. Time to spend our cycles
elsewhere.
> >>
> >>
> >> Olaf
> >>
> > schedule is fine for me.
> > I am actually trying to run some benchmark to figure what the difference
> > with -fstack-protector-all is.
> > I compiled php and will try to run phoronix test suite.
> >
> > I think we should offer a x86_64 kernel and userspace (build64 option
under
> > that machine?).
> > That will support more memory than 4 GB, support hardware NX, relax the
> > register number constraint on x86 32 bits (hardening with pie use one
> > register and x86 arch has not that much).
> >
> > Gilles
> I've had some experience with Linux 64 bit kernels, not all good.  The
> pae kernels support up to 64 GB.

I have no experience using more than 4 GB. What was the issue with 64-bits
kernels?

I was thinking a 64 bits kernel is better than PAE when there is much
memory.
In this interview
http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-analysis/open-sauce/44975-linus-torvalds-looking-back-looking-forward?start=2
Linus say: "there's no way to ever really get the Intel PAE model to work
perfectly"

Later on page 5
..."
The whole "support memory past the 4GB mark on a 32-bit architecture" thing
is something I absolutely hate. It impacted _everything_. It was really
painful, and people trying to run 32-bit x86 processors with 32GB of memory
was just a total disaster.
We could do it, but it was a memory management nightmare. And I was really
unhappy with how Intel seemed to drag their feet on the whole 64-bit side,
pushing instead their crazy and fundamentally flawed Itanium architecture.
Then AMD came around with x86-64, and there was finally light at the end of
a long, dark, nasty tunnel.
"...


Gilles


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colocation vs. Managed Hosting
A question and answer guide to determining the best fit
for your organization - today and in the future.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.