From owner-freebsd-current Fri Feb 28 7:42:38 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CCCA37B401; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 07:42:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB5BF43FA3; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 07:42:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h1SFgEaa098263; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:42:14 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) To: John Baldwin Cc: Garance A Drosihn , current@FreeBSD.ORG, Marcel Moolenaar Subject: Re: Any ideas why we can't even boot a i386 ? From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 28 Feb 2003 10:34:53 EST." Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:42:14 +0100 Message-ID: <98262.1046446934@critter.freebsd.dk> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message , John Baldwin writes: >I personally think that we should not support the 80386 in 5.x. >However when that has been brought up before there were a lot of >theoretical objections. Well, unless somebody actually manages to put a -current on an i386 and run the tests I suggested in a couple of weeks, then I think those theoretical objections stand very weakly in the light of proven reality :-) -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message