Does anyone know what architecture Knoppix is optimized for? Is it i386, i686 or something else?
Printable View
Does anyone know what architecture Knoppix is optimized for? Is it i386, i686 or something else?
i486
By the way, in case you didn't know www.distrowatch.com is the best source of Linux distribution information on the web. Their weekly news letter is really great too.
MattT
How do you know it is really i486? How do they know it is i486? I can't seem to find it documented anywhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viro
Quote:
On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 10:47:50AM -0400, Bill wrote:
> From what I can gather the kernel has been built for 686, not 586, so I get
The Kernel on the download version of KNoppix has been compiled in 368
compatibility mode.
> something about 'Pentium+ tcs instruction required' then a kernel fault.
When/where do you get this error?
> Would it be possible to supply supplying a second kernel for older machines
> on the CD?
The kernel on the CD is compiled to support the VERY OLD machines
starting from i386.
I may remove the FPU emulation support, though, to save some bytes on
the el torito bootfloppy. So, it won't run anymore on a plain i386
without an additional FPU (i486 and up should be OK).
Regards
-Klaus Knopper
saying "i486 and up should be OK" isnt true when removing software FPU would still exclude all the 486SX and 486SX2 chips. i know hardly anyone out there still uses 486s (so this isnt a big issue), but i always remembered the 486SX as being a more common chip, and the over-priced computers of that time were simply cheaper with the SX chips. i never even saw a 486DX chip until the Pentiums started to show up, and that was only at my school because they had the bucks to buy a ton of 486DX2 machines.Quote:
The kernel on the CD is compiled to support the VERY OLD machines
starting from i386.
I may remove the FPU emulation support, though, to save some bytes on the el torito bootfloppy. So, it won't run anymore on a plain i386
without an additional FPU (i486 and up should be OK).
I may may not be using it but I have a 486 DX/100 sitting in the closet about 10 feet from me and most people I knew around that time stayed away from the SX chips like the plague and BTW that 486 ran faster that Pentium 60 that's sitting on top of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenomorph
around that time most people didn't know that much about computers to know what to get and what not to get - and the ONLY people i knew who had a 486 only had SXs.... i had a SX2 50, a good friend had a SX 33, and a good friend from school had a SX 25. anyone who didnt have a 486SX had a 286/386/Mac or Apple II. one friend of mine went right to a Pentium.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen
i read at some point back then that the differnce between a SX and a DX was *just* the FPU thing, and i seriously dont know of any difference that would make with most games and apps. i dont recall ever running anything that used floating point stuff. so why would you avoid the SX like the plague? wtf were you running then? fractal programs? what games used the FPU? Wolf3d was 286, Doom was 386. Windows had built in 387 emulation i think, and i dont recall any Office-type apps using the FPU.
Quake was the first game i ran that said it took advantage of FPU, and even then it wasnt playable on anything but the newest Pentiums then.
IIRC the SX was just a DX crippled by Intel and we did a lot of work with a couple of custom database programs that we had written and the DX made quite a difference especially with the statistical analysis one and the extra $100 or so you paid for the DX wasn't really a hell of lot extra on a $3000 computer anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenomorph