From owner-freebsd-current Sun Dec 15 1:26:58 2002 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 8AA8C37B401 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 01:26:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9B5A43EA9 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 01:26:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@critter.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 gBF9QqJe052066; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:26:52 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Nate Lawson Cc: Erik Trulsson , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 80386 out of GENERIC From: phk@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 15 Dec 2002 01:17:29 PST." Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:26:52 +0100 Message-ID: <52065.1039944412@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 , Nate Lawson wri tes: >On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Erik Trulsson wrote: >> The only remotely good reason I have heard for removing support for 386 >> in the default configuration is that having it in would pessimize >> performance too much for more modern CPUs. How valid that reason is I >> cannot judge, but I guess it is possible. > >Could someone enlighten me as to why we don't leave 386 support in for the >boot kernel so the floppies will at least boot? Note that performance >shouldn't be an issue when installing. Because few if any 80386 computers have the ram it takes to run sysinstall. -- 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