Re: Linux and 6x86
jdhazard (jdhazard@texas.net)
Fri, 7 Dec 2096 01:21:03 -0600
----------
> From: James L. McGill <fishbowl@fotd.netcomi.com>
> To: B. James Phillippe <bryan@terran.org>
> Cc: seth <seth.edwards@pobox.com>; linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
> Subject: Re: Linux and 6x86
> Date: Friday, December 06, 1996 6:20 PM
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 6 Dec 1996, B. James Phillippe wrote:
>
>
> > > kernel would be the best to run using the Cyrix 6x86. I've followed
most
> >
> > I think that 2.1.5+ is looking best so far. From experience, I've
> >
>
> Is this meant to imply that Cyrix chips are a problem?
> Is there some reason they are not compatable with e.g., 2.0.27 ?
>
>
> ------------------------+----------------------------------------------
> James L. McGill | NETCOM Interactive
> Programmer / Analyst | Dallas, Texas
> <fishbowl@netcom.com> | -=[ http://www.conservatory.com/~fishbowl ]=-
> ------------------------+----------------------------------------------
> The steady state of disks is full. -- Ken Thompson
>
I have had no problems compiling and running the Cyrix Patch#3 on a P120
with 2.1.9 - 2.1.13. However, 2.1.14 compiles but fails to compile the
modules when I try to make modules.
Jeff