March 2006 - openSUSE AMD64 - openSUSE Mailing Lists

Opteron vs Celeron-D EMT64
by pierre 20 May '06

20 May '06

Dear Digiterati We've spent several months modifying our legacy Solaris code (apps and drivers) to work on Opteron motherboards using SuSE10. Now the project manager said: Take a look at these other Intel motherboards using the Celeron-D (341) (because they're cheaper) http://indigo.intel.com/Syndication/DistributeModule.aspx?a=55&m=154&l=1&pp… Googling around I read claims and counterclaims stating that neither AMD or Intel has "true 64-bit", whatever that means. Can anyone point me to an unbiased site that would explain the differences clearly? TIA & cheers --

3 3

Trouble installing the nVidia drivers
by Constantine 'Gus' Fantanas 04 Apr '06

04 Apr '06

Hi all. I am trying kernel 2.6.15-rc5, which I downloaded from the SuSE ftp site. When trying to install the nVidia 8178 drivers, the nVidia installer fails and in the nVidia error log file I see an error message about the kernel lacking the vmap() function. Since I tried to "slim down" the kernel, it is possible I did not set an option I should have. Could anybody comment on this? Regards, Gus Fantanas -- Running 64-bit Linux on AMD64

2 2

'make' errors while trying to configure a kernel
by Constantine 'Gus' Fantanas 31 Mar '06

31 Mar '06

Hello all. I went to ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/kernel/kotd/x86_64/HEAD, downloaded the rpm 'kernel-source.x86_64.rpm', and installed it. However, when I attempt to start the configurator, I get a bunch of errors: presario:/usr/src/linux # make xconfig HOSTCC scripts/basic/fixdep In file included from /usr/include/bits/posix1_lim.h:153, from /usr/include/limits.h:144, from /usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/4.0.2/include/limits.h:122, from /usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/4.0.2/include/syslimits.h:7, from /usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-suse-linux/4.0.2/include/limits.h:11, from scripts/basic/fixdep.c:113: /usr/include/bits/local_lim.h:36:26: error: linux/limits.h: No such file or directory scripts/basic/fixdep.c: In function ‘use_config’: scripts/basic/fixdep.c:214: error: ‘PATH_MAX’ undeclared (first use in this function) scripts/basic/fixdep.c:214: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once scripts/basic/fixdep.c:214: error: for each function it appears in.) scripts/basic/fixdep.c:214: warning: unused variable ‘s’ scripts/basic/fixdep.c: In function ‘parse_dep_file’: scripts/basic/fixdep.c:310: error: ‘PATH_MAX’ undeclared (first use in this function) scripts/basic/fixdep.c:310: warning: unused variable ‘s’ make[1]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 1 make: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2 I get similar errors with 'make menuconfig' and 'make' terminates. Now, this is the "SuSEfied" kernel source rpm! Am I doing something wrong? (Probably, but what?) The problem seems to be related to gcc. Fortunately, I have the SuSE 10 DVD. Should I downgrade my gcc? TIA for your time. Regards, Gus Fantanas -- Running 64-bit Linux on AMD64

2 2

RE: [suse-amd64] Opteron vs Celeron-D EMT64 (Off topic)
by Black, Alain 28 Mar '06

28 Mar '06

> -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Chu [mailto:chu@tes-mail.jpl.nasa.gov] > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:34 PM > To: mmarion(a)qualcomm.com; suse-amd64(a)suse.com > Subject: Re: [suse-amd64] Opteron vs Celeron-D EMT64 > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 12:31:28PM -0800, pierre wrote: > > > Googling around I read claims and counterclaims stating that neither AMD > or > > Intel has "true 64-bit", whatever that means. > > I wonder if they're referring to the old DEC Alpha systems which ran > "Tru64 UNIX". They were 64 bit ONLY, none of this 32 bit compatible > feature of the 64 bit offerings from other vendors. It's funny that > we are still worrying about 32/64 bit mix-ups 15 years after the Alpha > systems forced everyone to either rebuild their code or get new COTS > software (and about 5 years after its demise). > > eyc > > -- > Check the List-Unsubscribe header to unsubscribe > For additional commands, email: suse-amd64-help(a)suse.com [Black, Alain] We just purchased 2 new HP Alpha ES47s last year. Great boxes, blindingly fast. I'll be sad to see the Alpha finally go. I will also miss Tru64 UNIX. It's TruCluster is the closest thing to VMS style clustering that I've seen in the UNIX world. I've gotten spoiled by Tru64. If you plug in multiple paths to the SAN, it automatically configures them as active-active. -Alain.

1 0

RE: [suse-amd64] hardware question
by Black, Alain 28 Mar '06

28 Mar '06

> -----Original Message----- > From: Toll, Eric [mailto:eric@vipstructures.com] > Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 7:47 AM > To: suse-amd64(a)suse.com > Subject: [suse-amd64] hardware question > > Hello all. I may be making the switch to suse server 9 > enterprise. > Have a need to run Coldfusion MX 7 and don't want another > server.. > SUSE 9 Server Ent is a supported platform BSD isn't :( > > > I noticed that the Suse Box comes with both i386 and AMD64. > Naturally I was leaning towards AMD64 version. > > Now I am running FreeBSD-AMD64, very well on a system: > > Gigabyte AMD 8111/8131/8151 / Socket 940 - 2x Opteron > 2 Gb Regsitered ECC > 3Ware SATA RAID Controller (Mirror) with (2) 250Gb WD Raid > Edition Drives. > ATI 128Bit AGP Video Card (X Accelerated) > > > Anyone see any major issues with my hardware? > Dare I ask if the AMD64 linux kernel for suse is tuned "as > good" as i386? > > Any thoughts etc are welcome. > > Regards, > Eric > > > > > -- > Check the List-Unsubscribe header to unsubscribe > For additional commands, email: suse-amd64-help(a)suse.com [Black, Alain] Eric, Your hardware looks pretty standard, so I wouldn't expect any errors. SUSE (Novell) has a hardware database that you can check out for specifics. http://hardwaredb.suse.de/index.php?LANG=en_UK Personally, I think that you are making a good choice. I have been very pleased with SUSE SLES 8 and 9 on the AMD64 platform as far as performance and stability. I have a server that was up for 377 days, before I shut it down to add more memory. There is a recommended procedure for installing the ATI drivers that are downloaded from the ATI site where you turn them into an RPM and install the RPM so that YAST can keep track of it. I have never installed the i386 version of SLES, but may be doing that this year for testing some Oracle components that are not certified on AMD64. -Alain

1 0

RE: [suse-amd64] motherboard recommendation - slightly off topic :-)
by Toll, Eric 28 Mar '06

28 Mar '06

> To: suse-amd64(a)suse.com > Subject: RE: [suse-amd64] motherboard recommendation - > slightly off topic :-) > > Jonathan Brooks wrote on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:57 PM:: > > > Hi! > > > > Thanks for all the feedback - it's only going to be a > regular PC, not > > a server/workstation so I think I'll go with my initial > thought which > > was to go with Asus (A8N-SLI Deluxe). I may end up running Linux > > through VMware anyway, so the hardware is sort of irrelevant.... > > > > The only thing I would add to others' comments is that I used > to have an A8N-SLI Deluxe and was really happy with it, but > the chipset heatsink/fan dislodged (without any help from > me!), frying the chipset. > Subsequent examination showed that the clamps were really > flimsy. I upgraded it to the A8N-SLI Premium which replaces > the HSF with a heatpipe & haven't had any problems. > > Over the years, most of my hardware problems have been due to > dying fans, so the elimination of the fan can only help > reliability (and makes for a slightly quieter PC too). > > I think it was well worth the tiny (~5%) additional outlay > for the extra reliability. > > Just looking at the Asus website, you might also consider the > newer A8N32-SLI Deluxe which is also fanless (the 32 refers > to the 2x16 bit PCI-E bus - double the width of the A8N). It > also appears to have a few other improvements (e.g. faster > memory bus, more efficient power use leading to lower > temperatures) It appears to carry about a 20% price premium > (which is still tiny compared to the combined cost of > mobo+cpu+ram). > > Phil > -- > I too have the ASUS Premium (A8N-SLI), the heat pipe is neat-o, and quiet and no chipset fans to die on you. Also I really like my Antec NEO 550 He (High Efficiency) Power supply. It is COOL to the touch, even after running torture work for 8 hours. The fan inside this PSU has yet to turn on. Totally silent, makes almost no heat. Very nice PSU for server or workstation. I had an nvidia card in my server and the GPU fan went all melty after a few years. Didn't know it until I looked inside case. Now I have an ATI AGP with a large heat sync on the video chip....

1 0

RE: [suse-amd64] motherboard recommendation - slightly off topic :-)
by Phil Betts 28 Mar '06

28 Mar '06

Jonathan Brooks wrote on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:57 PM:: > Hi! > > Thanks for all the feedback - it's only going to be a regular PC, not > a server/workstation so I think I'll go with my initial thought which > was to go with Asus (A8N-SLI Deluxe). I may end up running Linux > through VMware anyway, so the hardware is sort of irrelevant.... > The only thing I would add to others' comments is that I used to have an A8N-SLI Deluxe and was really happy with it, but the chipset heatsink/fan dislodged (without any help from me!), frying the chipset. Subsequent examination showed that the clamps were really flimsy. I upgraded it to the A8N-SLI Premium which replaces the HSF with a heatpipe & haven't had any problems. Over the years, most of my hardware problems have been due to dying fans, so the elimination of the fan can only help reliability (and makes for a slightly quieter PC too). I think it was well worth the tiny (~5%) additional outlay for the extra reliability. Just looking at the Asus website, you might also consider the newer A8N32-SLI Deluxe which is also fanless (the 32 refers to the 2x16 bit PCI-E bus - double the width of the A8N). It also appears to have a few other improvements (e.g. faster memory bus, more efficient power use leading to lower temperatures) It appears to carry about a 20% price premium (which is still tiny compared to the combined cost of mobo+cpu+ram). Phil -- ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the H.E Information Systems Ltd. Tel: 0161 866 9066 Web: www.heis.co.uk This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.clearswift.com **********************************************************************

1 0

Problems with Skype - no sound
by Janis Klava 28 Mar '06

28 Mar '06

Trying to run Skype on an Opteron system under SuSE 10.0 with all latest upgrades but can not get any sound. Novell did send a newsletter with a howto but at the time could not access the said url as it kept loading and quitting. Does anyone have a solution for this problem. TIA Janis

2 1

hardware question
by Toll, Eric 27 Mar '06

27 Mar '06

Hello all. I may be making the switch to suse server 9 enterprise. Have a need to run Coldfusion MX 7 and don't want another server.. SUSE 9 Server Ent is a supported platform BSD isn't :( I noticed that the Suse Box comes with both i386 and AMD64. Naturally I was leaning towards AMD64 version. Now I am running FreeBSD-AMD64, very well on a system: Gigabyte AMD 8111/8131/8151 / Socket 940 - 2x Opteron 2 Gb Regsitered ECC 3Ware SATA RAID Controller (Mirror) with (2) 250Gb WD Raid Edition Drives. ATI 128Bit AGP Video Card (X Accelerated) Anyone see any major issues with my hardware? Dare I ask if the AMD64 linux kernel for suse is tuned "as good" as i386? Any thoughts etc are welcome. Regards, Eric

1 0

Re: [suse-amd64] Opteron vs Celeron-D EMT64
by chu＠tes-mail.jpl.nasa.gov 27 Mar '06

27 Mar '06

On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 12:31:28PM -0800, pierre wrote: > Googling around I read claims and counterclaims stating that neither AMD or > Intel has "true 64-bit", whatever that means. I wonder if they're referring to the old DEC Alpha systems which ran "Tru64 UNIX". They were 64 bit ONLY, none of this 32 bit compatible feature of the 64 bit offerings from other vendors. It's funny that we are still worrying about 32/64 bit mix-ups 15 years after the Alpha systems forced everyone to either rebuild their code or get new COTS software (and about 5 years after its demise). eyc

3 2