[rescue] RE: WinNT/2K/98/95 "up times"
rescue at sunhelp.org
Mon Jun 18 20:56:04 CDT 2001
Isn't it actually a different HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer), not a
Just picking nits....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joshua D. Boyd" <jdboyd at cs.millersville.edu>
To: <rescue at sunhelp.org>
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 9:37 PM
Subject: Re: [rescue] RE: WinNT/2K/98/95 "up times"
> NT guys still need different kernels. You just don't have to recompile
> Joshua Boyd
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Brian Hechinger wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 01:51:42AM +0100, Paul Sladen wrote:
> > >
> > > I know this might be a bit /strange/ to you Solaris and NT guys; but
> > well, more to the NT guys, back in the old BSD days we rebuilt kernels
> > > you considered recompiling the kernel. My Dual PPro200 (before the
> > > blew up) could do it in 6 minutes with `-j3'.
> > we had a Dual PPro200 setup a couple years ago that could tear through
> > entire 'make world' in FreeBSD in under 20 minutes. it has more to do
> > the way you layout the disks than it does the CPU power.
> > > I also can't see why Mandrake would want to ship a Uni-processor
> > > perhaps you might like to try a real distribution like Debian
> > because SMP support on a Uni-processor machine incures overhead that
> > need to be there. i've done (and i've seen other people do and populate
> > pages with info from) testing proving that running an SMP kernel on a
> > box is a huge waste of clock cycles.
> > although the copy of redhat we had at half.com came with both an SP and
> > kernel (that didn't stop me from rolling my own though)
> > cheers,
> > -brian
> > _______________________________________________
> > rescue maillist - rescue at sunhelp.org
> > http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue
> rescue maillist - rescue at sunhelp.org
More information about the rescue