Return to BSD News archive
#! rnews 1906 bsd Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!serv.hinet.net!nctuccca.edu.tw!howland.erols.net!news1.erols.com!news From: Ken Bigelow <kbigelow@www.play-hookey.com> Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Am5x86 Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 17:42:21 -0700 Organization: A poorly-installed InterNetNews site Lines: 34 Message-ID: <320D2C6D.7765@www.play-hookey.com> References: <fred-0808961614150001@st-ursen.lightside.net> <4uf8mo$ium@main.gbdata.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: kenjb05.play-hookey.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I) Gary Clark II wrote: > > In article <fred-0808961614150001@st-ursen.lightside.net>, > Fred Condo <fred@lightside.net> wrote: > >So is FreeBSD definitively compatible with the 586 chip? I am not having > >any luck installing 2.1.5 on my 586 system. The installation keeps > >crashing with memory faults and error 11's. The system memory self-test > >passes, however. > > > Hello, > > This can be sign of either bad memory OR a bad cache. You may want to > disable your external cache and try again. > > NOTE: FreeBSD will stress your memory many times harder than either your > self test or MS-windows. > > Gary Just to confirm compatibility: My secondary server (which among other things runs my daughter's MUX) is running an AMD 5x86-133 at full speed with no trouble. Currently it runs 2.1R; I haven't upgraded yet. However, with decent RAM and a fast enough cache, it runs fine. I can also verify (from too much personal experience) that FreeBSD will demand far more of your cache than DOS/Windoze ever could. Try Gary's suggestion as a first step. -- Ken Are you interested in | byte-sized education | http://www.play-hookey.com over the Internet? |