[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: RedHat9 and my Cyrix-chip machine conflict (?)
- From: Bob McClure Jr <robertmcclure earthlink net>
- To: redhat-install-list redhat com
- Subject: Re: RedHat9 and my Cyrix-chip machine conflict (?)
- Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 09:44:09 -0500
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 11:29:50PM -0700, David Morgan wrote:
> I posted a problem here related to a RedHat version 8-to-9 upgrade
> attempt, but my problem proves to have nothing to do with the upgrade as
> such but seems to be some more generic, fundamental incompatibility
> between my machine and version 9 of RedHat. Before I decide to abandon
> the attempt to put RedHat 9 on this machine, any feedback on my theory
> about the problem would be useful.
>
> The symptom: a straightforward, from scratch, plain vanilla installation
> of RedHat 9 completes successfully. But at boot time, when vmlinuz tries
> to run I get streaming screenfulls of messages something like:
>
> [<c010c1b47>] handle_vm86_fault [kernel] 0x4b4 (0xc1b4c00e)
>
> My 4-5 year old emachine has a Cyrix chip in it. The installed vmlinuz
> kernel image file came out of the "i686" rpm (there is also an "i586"
> rpm on the CD). I believe Intel expands the machine language instruction
> set for its chips with successive generations, each being a superset of
> the previous. And "i686" means latest, or at least later set than
> "i586." I thought the Cyrix (Pentium workalike) might not support the
> i686 instructions. However I see that the RedHat 8-- which runs just
> fine-- also came from "i686" rpms on the RedHat 8 CDs.
>
> Could the RedHat 9 CD's "i686" rpm's vmlinuz indulge deeper into the
> instruction set and contain machine instructions that weren't in RedHat
> 8's "i686" vmlinuz, and are unsupported by the Cyrix CPU? Long shot
> explanation but I'm out of gas and ready to concede I need a different
> machine unless some revelation appears. Any ideas, please let me know.
> Thanks.
I have an old Cyrix MII machine as my firewall. I believe it is
correctly regarded as an i686. I've not had any problem with it.
Cheers,
--
Bob McClure, Jr. Bobcat Open Systems, Inc.
robertmcclure earthlink net http://www.bobcatos.com
You may need to lose everything to find out that
God is all you need.
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]