[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Can Indy be installed on top of Mandrake instead of RedHat?
I have previously installed RedHat 6.2 and then did the upgrade with the
packages in the diff directory and got a number of errors. I do not have
them now with me but I have them at home and I can send them to you.
Is it OK with you if I do perform an Installation of Mandrake and then Indy
on top of it? We would at least get an idea if it is compatible or not.
My only problem is that I have no idea what Indy looks like when installed
since I have not been able to install it on my machine.
I have one PIII 550 and a P133 or something close to that and I can try
them and see what happens. The P133 is the best candidate since that is
not my production machine.
Open for suggestions.
PS Thanks for the lesson. You taught me some things I had no idea about.
At 02:30 рм 15/6/2000 +0200, you wrote:
> > I have one question to ask:
> > Can Indy be installed on top of Mandrake instead of RedHat?
> > I am asking this since Mandrake is based on RedHat and it is compiled for
>I never tried. They could be version conflict
> > pentium CPU's instead of 386.
>RedHat builds for 486 not 386 (but it works on 386 since with -m486
>compiler uses only common instructions but uses combinations who are
>more efficient on 486s)
>Second unlesss that you have a _true_ Pentium (not Pentium MMX, P2, P3
>or AMD) the most inefficient flag you could choose is precisely
>-mpentium, worse than -m486 and, if memory doesn't fail me -m386
>(benchmarked this). This is logical since optimizing code for Pentium
>is very unnatural (insertion of NOPs at the right place can do wonders
>for speed, use of loops for moving strings is faster than specific
>instruction to give just two examples) and these optimizations tend to
>get in the way with more powerful processors.
>Mandrake is presently using gcc-2.95 and this is a better compiler
>than egcs-1.1.2 used by RedHat. However I have stumbled upon a couple
>cases where gcc-2.95 failed to compile and it is still not trusted
>cases where gcc-2.95 failed to sompile and egcs succeeded however this
>could be due to gcc being more strict. But I have also heard it is
>still not considered mature enough to be officially acccepted by the
>kernel people so I prefer stay away from it.
>Now as I said me "compiled for pentium" gives no speed increase on
>anything else than a true pentium, gcc-2.95 does.
> Jean Francois Martinez
>Project Independence: Linux for the Masses