From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 6 15:35:02 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A728816A403 for ; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 15:35:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ed@hoeg.nl) Received: from palm.hoeg.nl (palm.hoeg.nl [83.98.131.212]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C14913C455 for ; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 15:35:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ed@hoeg.nl) Received: by palm.hoeg.nl (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C0B021CC6E; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 17:35:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 17:35:00 +0200 From: Ed Schouten To: Nikolas Britton Message-ID: <20070406153500.GE6950@hoeg.nl> References: <20070405103708.GC842@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20070405.140109.39240822.imp@bsdimp.com> <20070406142326.GC6950@hoeg.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7CZp05NP8/gJM8Cl" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) Cc: FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: Do we need this junk? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:35:02 -0000 --7CZp05NP8/gJM8Cl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Nikolas Britton wrote: > On 4/6/07, Ed Schouten wrote: > >* Nikolas Britton 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 > Break what? Renaming a platform is the root of all evil. Think about the big amount of ports and source code that just check for $arch =3D=3D "i386". That's the reason the i386 port is still named i386, though it doesn't even support i386 at all (got removed in 6.x). > The primary reason for doing this is optimization and simplification > of support / development. Indeed. You'll simplify development, because half of the developers is unable to run the bloody thing. Just run FreeBSD/amd64 if the legacy bits upset you. --=20 Ed Schouten WWW: http://g-rave.nl/ --7CZp05NP8/gJM8Cl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFGFmik52SDGA2eCwURAlQNAJ0WO0+/U2KKD8AmJE5SUMn4V9CzAACfQvgD cV4HOyu98jANhjfbWp9EGkg= =o278 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7CZp05NP8/gJM8Cl--