Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 10:12:39 -0500 From: eculp@unixmania.com To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Upgrading from an old athlon to a new 64 bit one. Message-ID: <20070628101239.6fs4qrpz8k8kkosw@intranet.unixmania.com> In-Reply-To: <20070628011057.5a0d90b5@gumby.homeunix.com.> References: <20070627145452.ytifppt70oc480s8@intranet.unixmania.com> <20070628011057.5a0d90b5@gumby.homeunix.com.>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com>: > On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:54:52 -0500 > eculp@unixmania.com wrote: > >> I have just stuck the disks from an old AMD Athlon(tm) (1333.39-MHz >> 686-class CPU) into a new box with an AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor >> 3800+ (2387.78-MHz 686-class CPU). I am still building a daily >> kernel with the old configuration and all is well. Of course the >> old configuration was/is i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit >> apps. > > Are you sure about that? there are few compelling reasons to go to > 64-bit, if you already have a working system. As far as performance is > concerned, it may go either way. Hi RW, I probably didn't explain very well. I'll try again. The machines that I am updating are all athlon 32 bit machines, which =20 I have been doing a daily cvsup, buildworld, buildkernel, =20 installkernel, installworld and weekly portupgrade for several years. =20 I just removed the disks from one that is running current and another =20 that is running RELENG, both still running kernels cvsup-ed and =20 compiled yesterday as well as userland. The ports are also up to date. What I am trying to do is compile an amd64 kernel, install it and see =20 what happens ;) I can always go back to the generic kernel compiled in =20 sys/i386. If all were to go well, I would then recompile all my ports. My problem is that when I created a sys/amd64/conf/AMD (just a generic =20 kernel with PF added) file and went to /usr/src and tried make =20 buildkernel KERNCONF=3DAMD it didn't find the kernel configuration file. =20 I tried with paths, etc. and no luck. I also see that my daily =20 compiles and installs have not changed userland programs. =20 /usr/bin/file shows: c++: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 =20 (FreeBSD), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped Using c++ and an example. I assume it should give a 64-bin executable =20 if it were. This particular file was built and installed this morning. The bottom line is that I'm totally ignorant as to this change and =20 have been doing some really dumb searches in that I haven't found what =20 I'm missing. I'm convenced that it is something braindead simple but =20 I am still looking. The good news is that both the current and RELENG boxes are working =20 well with all as before. Again any suggestions or even flames with more information are appreciated. ed >> Right now all is >> working fine with todays, sources and kernel except they are compiled >> for Intel. > > They are compiled for i386; Intel and AMD both produce CPUs for both > platforms. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.or= g" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070628101239.6fs4qrpz8k8kkosw>