| From: | Noèl Köthe <noel(at)debian(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | opteron port [was: Re: Call for port reports] |
| Date: | 2003-10-30 14:41:21 |
| Message-ID: | 1067524881.1359.85.camel@localhost |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Am So, den 26.10.2003 schrieb Bruce Momjian um 02:38:
> > All 93 tests passed.
...
> > Linux pergolesi 2.4.22 #1 SMP Mon Aug 25 20:56:25 CEST 2003 i686 GNU/Linux
> >
> > It says i686 but its AMD Opteron:
> >
> > noel(at)pergolesi:~/pgsql$ cat /proc/cpuinfo |more
...
> > model name : AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 240
...
> I am confused how to handle this. Is this running in 32-bit mode? I am
> inclined to mention Opteron only when tested in 64-bit mode, because I
> think we all assume a 32-bit Opteron is the same as a standard
> AMD/Intel. Does uname report differently in 64-bit mode.
You are right. Its now just like an i386 so it doesn't make sense to
list it. When I will get access to an 64bit Opteron system I will test
it again.
--
Noèl Köthe <noel debian.org>
Debian GNU/Linux, www.debian.org
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2003-10-30 15:04:39 | Re: Bug in Rule+Foreing key constrain? |
| Previous Message | Larry Rosenman | 2003-10-30 14:35:55 | SCO released UP3 today... (fwd) |