[ATrpms-users] FC4 to FC5 and lame

[Jay Cornell]

Axel Thimm wrote:

>On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 05:53:04AM -0400, Jay Cornell wrote:
>  
>
>>Hello.  I have never posted to this group before, so I hope the 
>>questions are on topic.   I have been using the repository for about two 
>>years -- thank you -- this is really good stuff...
>>
>>I have two systems: one with FC4 (amd sempron 2200) and the other is FC5 
>>(amd 64 sempron 2800).   When I installed lame, it would not encode on 
>>the FC5 system without issuing the --noasm 3dnow option.
>>    
>>
>
>What does
>
>grep 3dnow /proc/cpuinfo
>
>say on both systems?
>
>  
>
this where I got confused.  Both systems have 3dnow...  And I'm running 
fairly similar kernels.

fc4 (amd sempron 2200)
kernel: 2.6.16-1.2069_FC4

flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic mtrr pge mca 
cmov pat pse36 mmx fxsr sse syscall mp mmxext 3dnowext 3dnow ts

fc5 (amd 64 sempron 2800)
kernel: 2.6.16-1.2111_FC5

flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic mtrr pge mca 
cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt lm 
3dnowext 3dnow pni lahf_lm ts ttp tm stc

>>I was wondering if you could explain how the packages are compiled
>>--or where i can go to see for myself-- and whether the FC4 package
>>is compiled differently from the FC5 version.  Since 3dnow is
>>supported by both processors, I decided to start tracing the
>>compiles first.
>>    
>>
>
>They use the same specfile, e.g. go to the bottom of
>http://atrpms.net/dist/fc5/lame/
>
>I guess this has to do with the hardware or the kernel used on FC4 vs
>FC5. BTW see also a similar bug report on
>
>http://bugzilla.atrpms.net/show_bug.cgi?id=800
>(In short: lame does the 3dnow check at runtime, but it fails)
>  
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>atrpms-users mailing list
>atrpms-users at atrpms.net
>http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
>