Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 13:36:31 -0500 From: "Nikolas Britton" <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> To: "Scott Long" <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Ed Schouten <ed@fxq.nl> Subject: Re: Do we need this junk? Message-ID: <ef10de9a0704061136s2dc35c06w431d6d3f8c05dc1@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <46166A5E.3090009@samsco.org> 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> <20070406142326.GC6950@hoeg.nl> <ef10de9a0704060731l71186e1duea689617af407f4b@mail.gmail.com> <20070406153500.GE6950@hoeg.nl> <46166A5E.3090009@samsco.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 4/6/07, Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> wrote: > Ed Schouten wrote: > > * Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 4/6/07, Ed Schouten <ed@fxq.nl> wrote: > >>> * 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. > >>> > >> 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. > Where is this coming from? I'm trying to debate some of the issues with FreeBSD and the only thing you've added to this thread is fuck off? Why?home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ef10de9a0704061136s2dc35c06w431d6d3f8c05dc1>