Best PAE policy?

johnraff · 2016-09-22 06:54:56

In the bl-welcome discussion, Bearded_Blunder has suggested that not all users who have PAE-capable processors would necessarily want to install a PAE kernel: https://forums.bunsenlabs.org/viewtopic … 493#p37493

Does anyone else have an opinion on this?

Should bl-welcome check users' available RAM before offering PAE?

nobody · 2016-09-22 07:50:38

There is no tangible benefit for the average user to not install a PAE kernel on a PAE-compatble processor, and people who want to probably know what's up and make the choice at download time (non-PAE kernel ISO).

So I'd say no. Let's maximize the resources BL makes use of by default. People can dial back later.

Bearded_Blunder · 2016-09-22 11:26:51

twoion wrote:

There is no tangible benefit for the average user to not install a PAE kernel on a PAE-compatble processor, and people who want to probably know what's up and make the choice at download time (non-PAE kernel ISO).

In almost all cases it's very much marginal either way, only ever an issue with P4 and earlier processors, PAE has been in the intel instruction set since the Pentium Pro in 1995, it's really not relevant to most systems of that era, having run both ways on a low memory Pentium III system, and a P4 (soon to be retired) with 512 MiB, I'd take issue with "no tangible benefit" though, the "average user" has more resources than that.. um

The "average user" will download the PAE iso to begin with, perhaps simply not asking may be a good approach:

website" wrote:

The 32bit ISO contains only a PAE-enabled kernel. If you have a platform that doesn’t support PAE, download bl-Hydrogen-i386+NonPAE_20160710.iso which comes with a non-PAE kernel instead.

Chances that someone's "platform" doesn't support PAE these days are minimal, given just how long ago PAE was introduced, personally, I think were I making the decisions, I might on the website say something more along the lines

The 32bit ISO contains only a PAE-enabled kernel. If you have a platform that doesn’t support PAE, or a very old system (pentium 4 or earlier) with low memory you might consider downloading bl-Hydrogen-i386+NonPAE_20160710.iso which comes with a non-PAE kernel instead.

then simply clean up bl-welcome by not checking or asking.

twoion wrote:

So I'd say no. Let's maximize the resources BL makes use of by default. People can dial back later.

Which begs the question. If that's policy, why a non-PAE iso at all?
I only asked the question to begin with, because I'm viewing bl-welcome as the place where new users get asked the things which will optimise their setup, which made this appear to me to be the most opportune moment to ask. If you're assuming any user is going to know, why bother at all? Nobody is going to be installing on a platform without processor support for PAE, if they do the experience will be far from good and they'll be having to switch to a text mode browser, plus other things which are compiled assuming support for later features than PAE.

Our #! heritage is "A distro well suited to old hardware", trying to pick the optimal kernel image for old hardware sits well with that, leaving folks to optimize themselves, somewhat less so.

Horizon_Brave · 2016-09-22 14:40:38

This invariably comes back to the question that has been circling the bl-welcome for a while..how much hand holding is too much or too little, and how much to put into the welcome script. The only issue I have is that PAE is a bit more of a 'deeper' subject that can lead to a lot of confusion if the user doesn't know what it is, or if he needs it. I'd probably be in the camp of leaving it out, as though most who know they don't want it (generally a more advanced user anyway) can just get the properly and clearly labled iso.

Realistic options = Good
Options catering to every possible instance = Clutter

Bearded_Blunder · 2016-09-22 15:41:03

Horizon_Brave wrote:

I'd probably be in the camp of leaving it out, as though most who know they don't want it (generally a more advanced user anyway) can just get the properly and clearly labled iso.

In the case a little guidance is given on the website re which .iso to pick, I'd tend to agree, but if you're going to ask at all, try to point the user the right way.

It's the less advanced users that need the guidance, the ones who ideally shouldn't want it, but don't know that. It matters not much where the guidance is though. Pre-download on the site, or in bl-welcome.

johnraff · 2016-09-23 02:54:49

History:

Originally we were shipping both PAE and non-PAE kernels in the isos, meaning 3 variations: i386 X PAE/non-PAE + i686 (there are no non-PAE 64bit processors)

Later, that was followed by shipping both kernels in the i386 iso, meaning a bigger filesize.

Realizing that relatively few users needed non-PAE nowadays we dropped it from our main isos.

At the same time, we wanted a CD-sized iso for people whose hardware didn't support booting from usb. Since such old hardware was the only likely candidate to need a non-PAE kernel, but a CD-sized iso couldn't take two kernels, we chose to ship the non-PAE kernel by default in the CD iso, as that would maximize the number of people who could install from it.

That was the point at which the processor-detection and PAE offer was added to bl-welcome. It is intended to allow people to install from a CD and subsequently get a modern PAE kernel.

Horizon_Brave · 2016-09-23 03:20:04

johnraff wrote:

History:
Originally we were shipping both PAE and non-PAE kernels in the isos, meaning 3 variations: i386 X PAE/non-PAE + i686 (there are no non-PAE 64bit processors)
Later, that was followed by shipping both kernels in the i386 iso, meaning a bigger filesize.
Realizing that relatively few users needed non-PAE nowadays we dropped it from our main isos.
At the same time, we wanted a CD-sized iso for people whose hardware didn't support booting from usb. Since such old hardware was the only likely candidate to need a non-PAE kernel, but a CD-sized iso couldn't take two kernels, we chose to ship the non-PAE kernel by default in the CD iso, as that would maximize the number of people who could install from it.
That was the point at which the processor-detection and PAE offer was added to bl-welcome. It is intended to allow people to install from a CD and subsequently get a modern PAE kernel.

I'm assuming when we were shipping both the PAE and nonPAEE together, the user could switch between them via GRUB menu? So both kernels were being seen at boot?

johnraff · 2016-09-23 05:00:45

^I think that's the way it came out. Memory had faded a bit...

Bearded_Blunder · 2016-09-23 15:28:26

This becomes academic for the next release since you'll get the i686 kernel regardless even if you ask for i586 anyone wanting anything more optimal for low memory, or no SMP support (also more overhead, even on processors that don't support it) is going to have to recompile. PAE ceases to be an issue. Debian only ship the i686 image for Stretch onwards linux-image-586 is a dummy package which pulls in linux-image-686 as a depend

Derailing this somewhat, if you're planning to keep a slimmed down CD size image for "old hardware" next release, the processor issue for old hardware will really be sse2, and if you can find a browser that actually works without. A problem in much more recent processors than any lacking PAE.

#1 2016-09-22 06:54:56

Best PAE policy?

#2 2016-09-22 07:50:38

Re: Best PAE policy?

#3 2016-09-22 11:26:51

Re: Best PAE policy?

#4 2016-09-22 14:40:38

Re: Best PAE policy?

#5 2016-09-22 15:41:03

Re: Best PAE policy?

#6 2016-09-23 02:54:49

Re: Best PAE policy?

#7 2016-09-23 03:20:04

Re: Best PAE policy?

#8 2016-09-23 05:00:45

Re: Best PAE policy?

#9 2016-09-23 15:28:26

Re: Best PAE policy?

Board footer