[CentOS-devel] CentOS 7 (1503) i686 Beta Architecture

Toni Spets toni.spets at iki.fi
Sat Jun 6 07:38:24 UTC 2015


If you think it this way, why bother with the i686 build at all? Your dual
core 2010 vintage Intel Atom D510 can run 64-bit CentOS 7 anyway. This is
why dropping SSE2 requirement would be benefitical as it would allow
running it with a larger amount of x86 CPUs that can't run the 64-bit
variation at all.

I do think there are a lot of x86 systems that have around 512 MB of RAM
that could still be used as small office servers, routers etc. that would
really benefit from a stable and well supported distribution like CentOS
is. They are not very useful for desktop use but many server tasks haven't
changed that much in 10 years but have been virtualized or have higher
traffic handling requirements. Surveying CentOS 6 users who run the i686
version on non-SSE2 CPUs would also give some sort of indication how many
potential users are going to be left out and would need to change their
enterprise grade distribution to something else when EOL hits.

My specific use case isn't really worth CentOS 7. I don't think I would
ever *really* run anything useful on a 12 year old laptop, it was just the
only x86 system I still have around. The CPU generation itself, however,
isn't completely useless for some other tasks.

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:41 PM, Trevor Hemsley <trevor.hemsley at ntlworld.com
> wrote:

>  Is it really worth the effort? The last Pentium III was released in 2002
> and you couldn't buy them after 2003 so we're talking about machines that
> are 12 or more years old. The fastest one you could ever buy is
> outperformed by a factor of more than 2 times by each core on my dual core
> 2010 vintage Intel Atom D510.
>
>
> On 05/06/15 21:22, Toni Spets wrote:
>
>  This would be rather unfortunate as that would also leave out all 32-bit
> only AMD processors (Athlon XP & co) as well according to Wikipedia where
> it's said Athlon 64 was the first one to add SSE2 and it can already run
> the 64-bit CentOS anyway.
>
>  I'm hoping there is more people that could +1 having support for
> pre-SSE2 CPUs so it would be seriously considered even though it might need
> massive rebuild of the multilib packages. EPEL doesn't have multilib yet
> (right?) so they can still adapt to whatever is going to be done. The
> packages would run on upstream as well anyway.
>
>  Taking into account the actual computing power of CPUs, I don't think
> it's unreasonable to run CentOS 7 on Pentium III or Athlon XP.
>
>  Thanks for considering.
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 9:44 PM, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote:
>
>>  On 06/05/2015 05:46 AM, Vladimir Stackov wrote:
>> > Greetings,
>> >
>> > currently we are maintaining own CentOS 7 i686 rebuild and I would like
>> > to kindly ask you to replace following macros from gcc.spec:
>> >
>> > %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7
>> > %ifarch %{ix86}
>> >    --with-arch=x86-64 \
>> > %endif
>> > %ifarch x86_64
>> >    --with-arch_32=x86-64 \
>> > %endif
>> >
>> > with that:
>> >
>> > %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7
>> > %ifarch %{ix86}
>> >         --with-arch=i686 \
>> > %endif
>> > %ifarch x86_64
>> >         --with-arch_32=i686 \
>> > %endif
>> >
>> > x86-64 causes gcc to use extended instruction set for produced code and
>> > it's impossible to run CentOS 7 i686 on older systems without SSE2
>> > instruction because of SIGILL.
>> > This affects Pentium 3, old VIA CPUs, old Xeons and some others.
>> >
>> > Is that possible?
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>>
>>  <snip>
>>
>> I don't think we can do this as I also use the RPMs produced for the
>> multilib portion of CentOS-7 x86_64 and we want our RPMs to be like
>> those from upstream for that purpose.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Johnny Hughes
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CentOS-devel mailing list
>> CentOS-devel at centos.org
>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Toni Spets
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing listCentOS-devel at centos.orghttp://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>
>


-- 
Toni Spets
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20150606/0267ab13/attachment.html>


More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list