Re: Hefty Big Iron Sun Machines.

On Sat, 2005-08-27 at 18:21 -0400, Lamar Owen wrote:

> Now, my question to spot is simply this: if I provide the capability to build 
> Aurora packages on, say, the E6500, what version does the box need to be 
> running?  If it is running CentOS 4, will that present any technical problems 
> to building Aurora packages?  (Since CentOS 4 has FC2 and FC3 in its 
> heritage).  Further, I have offered the use of the beast to help build 
> CentOS4 packages; any problem with that, spot?

Shouldn't matter -- for 99% of packages, the kernel doesn't matter, and
we build everything in a chroot anyway.

(everything except anaconda and glibc, and usually not even glibc.
Probably anaconda won't, really, as soon as I get off my lazy bum and
fix they keymap junk)

> On another technical note, for building packages, any thoughts on the 
> difference in performance between 24 400MHz/4MB cache CPU's and 14 400MHz/8MB 
> cache CPU's?

The 24 will almost certainly be significantly better for building the
kernel.  Pretty much nothing else has the smarts to use "make -J"
effectively, and historically we do an (understandably) _abysmal_ job of
scheduling simultaneous builds to compensate for that, so for the vast
majority of packages it'll probably be a negligible difference, but the
higher cache size should make them measurably, though not substantially,
faster.

-- 
  Peter

_______________________________________________
Aurora-sparc-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.auroralinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aurora-sparc-devel
Aurora FAQ: http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~mas01r/aurorafaq.html