This is part of The Pile, a partial archive of some open source mailing lists and newsgroups.
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] (OT) Linux limits From: Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 10:42:09 -0500 Thomas Lockhart wrote: > setting the limit to infinity by users. Don't know if Mandrake is > configured differently from RH6.1, but until I get this adjusted it > doesn't make a reasonable development machine... My experience has been that starting with version 6.0 Mandrake is diverging from RedHat. Mandrake 5.3 can properly be called 'RedHat 5.2+KDE+enhancements' -- Mandrake 6.0 and 6.1, being released before their RedHat counterparts, are not nearly as close. I tried using Mandrake 6.0 to build RPMs, and quickly replaced it with RedHat 6.0 -- Mandrake 6.0 used pgcc instead of egcs, for one. Caused me all manner of grief. Mandrake 6.1 may be better in this regard, but I am sticking with RedHat for the time being, as it is the current baseline target of the RPM distribution. From what I understand, the RedHat binary RPM's still work with Mandrake. Mandrake is now a full-fledged distribution, not just another RedHat knock-off. I'm going to have to get my home machine into a multidevelopment mode, with RedHat, Caldera, SuSE, and Mandrake multibooting, as each of these RPM-based distributions is different, although Mandrake and RedHat are more alike than SuSE and Caldera. Or, you can help me with Mandrake issues in both the source and binary RPM's, just as I am getting assistance from others with the Alpha patches, building/installing the RPM's under SuSE and Caldera, and other architecture (ARM and MIPS come to mind) issues. Portability amongst Linux distributions is becoming nearly as big of issue as portability amongst different Unices. === Subject: Re: What about Mandrake? From: Bernhard Rosenkraenzer <bero@redhat.de> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 11:49:02 +0100 (CET) On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, Gustav Schaffter wrote: > I have understood that Mandrake is compiled for 686, right? 586 actually. > I could of course recompile everything from the RH6.1 SRPMs to get it > 686 optimized, but what a mess. I just don't find time for that. But that'll give you the optimizations you want (i686). If you want more speed at the cost of some compatibility (different libstdc++), you'll want to upgrade to gcc 2.95.2 (rawhide) before recompiling. === Subject: Re: 686 distro. [Was: What about Mandrake?] From: Bernhard Rosenkraenzer <bero@redhat.de> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 12:53:31 +0100 (CET) On Tue, 28 Dec 1999, Gustav Schaffter wrote: > I know that Bernhard Rosenkraenzer <bero@redhat.de> has been working on > this task before. He has defined a number of packages that had > compilation problems and published the list on a page at the redhat > site. Unfortunately, I've lost the URL for his page. Bernhard? Do you > read this? Could you please provide us with your insights in this? There are no compilation problems if you stick with egcs, but the i686 optimizations in egcs suck. If you want real optimizations, you should use gcc 2.95.2 (or a 2.96 CVS snapshot... 2.96 has much better optimizations, but will (currently) generate broken code. 2.95.2 is stable.). - unfortunately, some bad code doesn't compile with gcc 2.95.2. In most cases, the patches are trivial though - I've put the ones I've built up at http://people.redhat.com/bero/gcc295. ===