Re: Installed 2.0 to SS4 ...

On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, mat wrote:
> Jima wrote:
>>  I tried it on one with 48mb of RAM; suffice it to say it didn't go
>> so well.  Hopefully I'll get the one with 96mb back soon so I can
>> try it out.
>
> good lord, my poor old LX only has 32Mb of RAM so it really is going
> to be hard work. has anyone even tried installing 2.0 on something as
> ancient as a SS1/SS2?

  I've tried it with 2.0...a little.  It too didn't go very well.  I had 48 
or 64mb of RAM in my SS2, I forget.  Suffice it to say, I didn't try all 
that hard; doing anything on a sparcv7 is a bit painful. :P

> as nobody answered last time, can i check again: am i mad, or are
> there no official kernel updates since the stock 2.6.13-1.1603?

  For 2.0?  No.  The 2.1 beta has, uh, 2.6.16-1.2241sp7, but that's the one 
that doesn't work entirely reliably (locks up in the middle of installing 
glibc-common on many, many test cases).

> and another question: jima, what is this "~2.1 (beta)" that you so
> interestingly mention?

  See above.  It's got issues.  IIRC, on most attempts it freezes on 
glibc-common (i.e., right away).  Plus, I'm not sure how much effort is 
going to be put into that release (attempt?), as other leads may be more 
productive (like aiming for a currently-maintained-upstream release).

  At this point I'd like to applaud Spot and Dennis's efforts on attempting 
to produce the best Aurora possible.  You guys rock. :)

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