Re: [WBEL-devel] WBEL4 RC1 on VIA C3 CPU
Johnny Hughes <[email protected]> Fri, 29 Apr 2005 04:18:23 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.whitebox.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--===============1845384726== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-+4SaypJZykQf6+pw3LF9" --=-+4SaypJZykQf6+pw3LF9 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 21:01 -0500, John Morris wrote: > On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 12:26, Johnny Hughes wrote: >=20 > > The RHEL4 kernel doesn't support i586 ... I don't think that John modif= ied > > the WBEL4-RC1 boot kernel to support i586 either. (I could be wrong). > >=20 > > If WBEL4 is not going to support i586, you might try CentOS-4, as the b= oot > > kernel for anaconda is i586 and there is i586 support. > Boot kernels. I want WBEL4 to be able to use vendor released driver > discs for RHEL4. When it builds the boot media it looks for > kernel-BOOT, then i386, i586 and finally will take i686 if it is the > only thing available. For RHEL4 that is going to be i686 so any driver > discs are going to be built for i686. >=20 > So we have a problem. Looks like it is going to be possible to have > Pentium support OR RHEL4 driver compatibility at install time but not > both. Or is there some way out of this paradox I'm just not seeing? >=20 That is exactly correct :) ... I have been playing with creating a CD-1 that is i586 and one that is i686. boot.iso is too particular about the rest of the image files (stage2 hard drive image, etc.) to work by itself ... but I have had a little bit of success in creating separate CDs. > > Before anyone complains about CentOS trying to steal WBEL users ... I a= m > > not. If WBEL-4 supports i586 and your are a WBEL user, please use WBEL= -4 > > :). If not, I just wanted to point out that CentOS-4 might allow you t= o > > install on that platform. >=20 > Actually it might be THE option for i586 support. Since CentOS does > exist and supports Pentium class hardware it might make more sense for > WBEL to go for driver compatibility. Migration between rebuilds is > pretty simple so nobody gets orphaned without an upgrade path. The i586 support for CentOS is going to be maintained in some form ... but it might be as a separate CD-1 in the future. >=20 > Time for a fast debate folks. Survivor time, who gets voted off the > island, Epias or Enterprise hardware? The rebuild process is finally at > a stage where I think all packages (on both arches) are going to build > flawlessly on the pass currently running so it is this decision and > installing Oracle to get tora right that are the only remaining holds. > Assuming of course the compile doesn't hit yet another snag. And of > course I probably should go ahead and roll in the OO.o errata from this > week to avoid THAT hog of a download after every install. --=-+4SaypJZykQf6+pw3LF9 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCcfvfTKkMgmrBY7MRAlxSAJ4jBBFljgVsSB/mWJR2N/STJSI9agCdHTWe VMrVzApNfcdYnq/ZM4cUpAI= =YPNX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-+4SaypJZykQf6+pw3LF9-- --===============1845384726== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Whitebox-devel mailing list [email protected] http://beau.org/mailman/listinfo/whitebox-devel --===============1845384726==--