Linux for AMD64

Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
that works with the AMD64 CPU?

Thanks, Don

On Wed, 05 May 2004 11:06:02 -0500, Don McCarter wrote:

> Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> that works with the AMD64 CPU?
>
> Thanks, Don

Both SUSE and Mandrake have 64 bit versions. The 64 bit version of
Mandrake 10 is in beta, 9.2 is out.

In article <109i47nn6al7396@corp.supernews.com>, Don McCarter wrote:
> Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> that works with the AMD64 CPU?


SUSE has and AMD64, and Mandrake 10 is in public beta / release candidate
state.

--
Povl H. Pedersen - NoSpam@my.terminal.dk (yes - it works)
Get 5% discount on VMWare use discount/referral code: MRC-POVPED260

Don McCarter wrote:
> Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> that works with the AMD64 CPU?
>
> Thanks, Don
>
>
There's also Fedora and Gentoo. Mandrake 64bit Official is out of beta,
but only available to buy at the moment, no downloads yet.

"Don McCarter" <don_mccarter@charter.net> wrote in
news:109i47nn6al7396@corp.supernews.com:

> Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> that works with the AMD64 CPU?
>
> Thanks, Don
>
>

Mandrake 10 x86_64 RC1 works great for me on an A64 3200+ GA-K8TV800. I
haven't tried other distros but I did have plenty of problems with the
Beta-1 of Mandrake 10 x86_64. RC1 is much better, almost no problems.

The only major problem I have with it is it can't read the NTFS
formatted Raid-0 SATA drives. It's not the raid-0 nor the SATA that it
chokes on, but the combination of it being ntfs and bios raid (as
opposed to simple OS striping). I have installed mdk64 (bootable) on the
SATA raid-0 themselves in the past so I'm certain the problem involves
NTFS here. Linux sees it as 2 empty drives instead of one NTFS formatted
drive. My config is:

ide0 = XP Pro 64 [80GB] NTFS
ide1 = XP Pro 32 [80GB] NTFS
ide2 = Mandrake 64 [120GB] ext3
sata0+1 = 240GB [2-120GB with raid-0) NTFS



Linux can be tricky to setup if you have both IDE and SATA hard drives,
and several operating systems. I don't suggest booting any OS from SATA
when you're running both IDE and SATA. It can be done but I've found
errors on the sata drives under that configuration so I'd stay away
booting SATA if you also have IDE running.


One thing I've noticed about mdk64: If you change the amount of ram in
your box after mdk is installed, it won't run correctly anymore. That
problem doesn't occur with XP64.

On Wed, 05 May 2004 11:06:02 -0500, Don McCarter wrote:

> Does anyone know of a 64bit version of Linux
> that works with the AMD64 CPU?
>

Lots of happy customers in the Gentoo forums. The downside of Gentoo is
the compile times but with any AMD64 CPU it will fly.

K

On Wed, 05 May 2004 12:50:05 -0500, goblin <goblin@spooks.net> wrote:


>...
>Linux can be tricky to setup if you have both IDE and SATA hard drives,
>and several operating systems. I don't suggest booting any OS from SATA
>when you're running both IDE and SATA. It can be done but I've found
>errors on the sata drives under that configuration so I'd stay away
>booting SATA if you also have IDE running.
>...


From what I've heard, you'd be better off staying away from SATA
entirely. Another Intel technological disaster.

Hmmm...can you cite sources please?

Personally though, I'd wait and ensure that SATA is implemented directly
on a chipset, and NOT going through the PCI bus.

_ wrote in news:d00j90t9ldc2nokcgs94pbrhk9fp7io2a5@4ax.com:
>
> From what I've heard, you'd be better off staying away from SATA
> entirely. Another Intel technological disaster.
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Yee E-Mail: ayee AT mn dot rr dot com
President Home Page: http://home.mn.rr.com/andyyee
New Directions Engineering, Inc.

Godwin's Law: As a USENET thread grows, the probability of a reference
to Hitler or Nazis approaches 1.00.
Corollary: When such a reference is made, it is generally
recognized that the poster has LOST the argument.

On Thu, 06 May 2004 16:48:58 +0000, Andy Yee wrote:

> Hmmm...can you cite sources please?
>
> Personally though, I'd wait and ensure that SATA is implemented directly
> on a chipset, and NOT going through the PCI bus.
>

It's just arrived, the Nforce 3 250 has integrated SATA.

I don't find PCI SATA that much of a problem anyway, my NF2 box has no PCI
cards installed and you'd find it hard to transfer 133MB/s.

K

Various current threads over in blahblahblah.storage newsgroup. Yes
many issues hotly debated, but one thing remains the same: never be a
first adapter.


On Thu, 06 May 2004 16:48:58 GMT, Andy Yee <yeehaw@RRmn.rr.com> wrote:

>Hmmm...can you cite sources please?
>
>Personally though, I'd wait and ensure that SATA is implemented directly
>on a chipset, and NOT going through the PCI bus.
>
>_ wrote in news:d00j90t9ldc2nokcgs94pbrhk9fp7io2a5@4ax.com:
>>
>> From what I've heard, you'd be better off staying away from SATA
>> entirely. Another Intel technological disaster.
>>