[CentOS] CentOS 4.0 -> 4.1 update failing

[Johnny Hughes]

On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 09:54 +0200, Maciej Żenczykowski wrote:
> Okay, two questions then...
> 
> a) If (some) i386 packages are being built with -march=i486 then they 
> (possibly, I do realize there's only like 2 or 3 new instructions) won't 
> run on a 386 anyway, will they? so shouldn't they be called .i486.rpm?
> 
> b) If i386 is basically no longer used for anything anyway, shouldn't we 
> actually have no .386.rpm packages and instead have .486.rpm for most 
> stuff with .486/586/686/athlon.rpm for kernel/ssl/glibc?
> 
> c) If redhat isn't supporting anything below a 686 anyway then why don't 
> they switch all .386 packages all the way up to 686?  I know the 
> performance gain isn't stellar, but if the packages are not designed for 
> installation on anything < 686 then there's not much point in _not_ 
> compiling for 686 - the binary packages will be the approx same size 
> anyway and will require the same amount of CDspace/bandwidth.
> 
> I know someone will say that those packages could be used on a non-686 
> class CPU, but on a non-686 class CPU you don't want to be using a recent 
> distribution anyway, do you?  I have a 350MHz Celeron (which is a 686) and 
> it is already way to slow for any desktop/Xwindows applications  (Fedora 
> Core 2 on a Celeron 400 + 192MB ram is basically usable with a light 
> window manager [twm], but that's about the limit).  So the class of CPU's 
> which aren't 686, but which could use RHEL4/Centos4 are very limited 
> (aren't they?) to only a minimum core set of server applications...
> Anyway you get my drift... :) Comments?
> 
> Well Okay, so maybe it wasn't two :)

Well ... CentOS-4 is built with the default switches, which when
building the i386 distro on a P4 machine is usually:

-m32 -march=i386 -mtune=pentium4

although on some packages, it is:

-m32 -march=i386 -mtune=i686

building for i486 or i686 might be better, but is not what RHEL
does...so not what CentOS does.

The only SRPMS CentOS builds for other than .i386 targets for the .i386
distro (just like RHEL) are:

openssl, kernel, glibc

We do build both an i586 openssl and kernel ... and I am trying to build
an i586 glibc as well, though the i386 glibc should work OK according to
RH.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050621/6d316182/attachment.sig>