From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Nov 23 12:35:44 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA13351 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 12:35:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA13340 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 12:35:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA43270; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 12:36:47 -0800 (PST) To: Marius Bendiksen cc: John Polstra , joelh@gnu.org, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD on i386 memory model In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 23 Nov 1998 14:44:27 +0100." <3.0.5.32.19981123144427.00b40940@mail.scancall.no> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 12:36:46 -0800 Message-ID: <43266.911853406@zippy.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > >Of course we don't. Nobody who cares about speed is going to use a 486. > > Are you saying that we're going to say to people "Hey, FreeBSD is not > intended to run on anything less than a Pentium, we don't wish to get > involved with anything less, the people out there who're stuck with a 486 > had better go support Linux instead?" I think you read this incorrectly. Read it again. "Anyone who cares about speed is not going to use a 486" - does anyone else fail to see the logic in that statement? To put it another way, if I have an application that requires speed, I'm not going to use a Coleco Color Computer no matter how many optimizations someone may have added for it. I'll use the right tool for the job. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message