Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 16:23:26 +0200 From: Ed Schouten <ed@fxq.nl> To: Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Do we need this junk? Message-ID: <20070406142326.GC6950@hoeg.nl> In-Reply-To: <ef10de9a0704060715s6b5957daq2fe8a465362e3446@mail.gmail.com> References: <ef10de9a0704050258l4ea754b3n99a1239a81b844a0@mail.gmail.com> <20070405103708.GC842@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <ef10de9a0704050839g7b873dabw5a5e211140781781@mail.gmail.com> <20070405.140109.39240822.imp@bsdimp.com> <ef10de9a0704060715s6b5957daq2fe8a465362e3446@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--t0UkRYy7tHLRMCai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> wrote: > Well based on the stats I've posted maybe it's time to split FreeBSD > i386 into two platforms, one for embedded/legacy systems and one for > modern systems? The needs for each type of system are diametrically > opposed, and the modern ones make up the majority of deployed systems. > Perhaps FreeBSD i786 or IA32, with the minimum target being a > Willamette based Pentium 4, aka SSE2? So what's the practical advantage of that? That would only break stuff. Compiling a kernel without these options practically does the same thing. --=20 Ed Schouten <ed@fxq.nl> WWW: http://g-rave.nl/ --t0UkRYy7tHLRMCai Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFGFlfe52SDGA2eCwURArBjAJ90JaDe6YEH4/JM88vHb3Vc1i6fvgCeKfgs TBTBZM4xVgUf+pMN5c6oqL8= =zhTP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --t0UkRYy7tHLRMCai--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070406142326.GC6950>