From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 6 15:42:45 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 91E1D16A402 for ; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 15:42:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D04A13C469 for ; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 15:42:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from phobos.samsco.home (phobos.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l36FgZrL090451; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 09:42:35 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <46166A5E.3090009@samsco.org> Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 09:42:22 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2pre) Gecko/20070111 SeaMonkey/1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ed Schouten References: <20070405103708.GC842@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20070405.140109.39240822.imp@bsdimp.com> <20070406142326.GC6950@hoeg.nl> <20070406153500.GE6950@hoeg.nl> In-Reply-To: <20070406153500.GE6950@hoeg.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]); Fri, 06 Apr 2007 09:42:36 -0600 (MDT) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.5 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.8 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: FreeBSD Current , Nikolas Britton 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 15:42:45 -0000 Ed Schouten wrote: > * 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. >>> >> 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 == "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. > Better yet, there are plenty of hobby OS's like DragonFlyBSD that have taken deliberate steps to remove "useless bits". I suggest Nikolas dictate development practices to them instead of us. Scott