1 |
On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 12:10:38AM +0100, Achim Gottinger wrote: |
2 |
> Thomas Flavel wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 03:29:04PM -0700, drobbins@g.o wrote: |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > > 1.0_rc4-pre2 is fully compatible with all modern Intel and Intel-compatible |
7 |
> > > processors, from the i486 on up. While 1.0_rc4-pre2 is optimized for the |
8 |
> > > 486, Achim plans to build several different versions of 1.0_rc4 optimized for |
9 |
> > > various processors. 1.0_rc4-pre2 has been tested on K6 systems and works |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > I don't understand why not a 386? I kind of expected the distcd to be 386 |
12 |
> > binaries, and then to compile and install optimised to whatever my processor |
13 |
> > happens to be? What am I mis-understanding? ;) |
14 |
> > |
15 |
> > How would gentoo be installed on a 386? |
16 |
> |
17 |
> You can build all the sys packages with a CHOST of i386-pc-linux-gnu and merge them |
18 |
> to some temporary place. |
19 |
> Then chroot there and recompile and remerge all packages. Eighter do this a few times |
20 |
> or follow the dependencies |
21 |
> starting by glibc to be sure you have no statically linked in i486 assembler code in |
22 |
> there. Then you can build the |
23 |
> other stuff you need and you should have a i386 based system. |
24 |
> Do you still use i386 ? My oldest is an i486SX/25 with a 200MB HD running as a |
25 |
> firewall here under gentoo. |
26 |
|
27 |
No, I don't use any 386s, I'm just curious :) |
28 |
|
29 |
> The i486 version is definetly slower that the i686 version we had before using i386 |
30 |
> won't make things better. |
31 |
|
32 |
Is the performace hit really that great? |
33 |
|
34 |
> If there really is a need for a i386 version I can build one. |
35 |
|
36 |
I don't need one myself :) |
37 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
> > > sys-* layout |
40 |
> > > ------------ |
41 |
> > > |
42 |
> > > Achim and I have resolved how to determine what goes in the sys-* categories. |
43 |
> > > We are breaking with FreeBSD tradition by making the sys-* categories contain |
44 |
> > > _only_ a barebones, minimal system -- the minimal Gentoo system that can still |
45 |
> > > recompile itself, with a few exceptions. Previously, what was included in |
46 |
> > > sys-* was more of a subjective thing, i.e. what I would like to see in a basic |
47 |
> > > Gentoo Linux server install, the tools I personally like, etc. |
48 |
> > > |
49 |
> > > Rather than do this, we're going to be integrating some new functionality into |
50 |
> > > Portage that's going to be very, very nice and will allow everyone to have the |
51 |
> > > kind of "base" system that they like. Portage will recognize your selection not |
52 |
> > > only at install time, but throughout the lifetime of your system, prompting you |
53 |
> > > to upgrade or add new packages when necessary. |
54 |
> > |
55 |
> > Excellent. Roughly what size is minimum now? |
56 |
> |
57 |
> Currently about 200MB with lots of package-docs, and the development tools, but if |
58 |
> you unmerge |
59 |
> all sys-devel packages beside the c++-libs and spython remove /usr/doc and /usr/src |
60 |
> and all the static libs in /lib and /usr/lib you only need about 130MB and still have |
61 |
> a runable system. Other optimizations could be turning of building |
62 |
> of localdata-stuff in glibc removing unneccesary zoneinfo and terminfo entrys... |
63 |
> |
64 |
> Hmm, maybe we should introduce a new USE flag to trigger build of packages with only |
65 |
> the really neccesary stuff. |
66 |
> |
67 |
|
68 |
imo it would be great to be able to do that |
69 |
|
70 |
- Tom |