Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 14:42:09 +0100 From: Philippe PEGON <Philippe.Pegon@crc.u-strasbg.fr> To: dick hoogendijk <dick@nagual.st> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Fw: GENERIC and DEFAULTS Message-ID: <436A13B1.8090302@crc.u-strasbg.fr> In-Reply-To: <20051103132400.1f983424.dick@nagual.st> References: <075001c5dff5$e859fbc0$8adb7bd1@icarz.com> <43693D43.2000400@crc.u-strasbg.fr> <20051103132400.1f983424.dick@nagual.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
dick hoogendijk wrote: > On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 23:27:15 +0100 > Philippe PEGON <Philippe.Pegon@crc.u-strasbg.fr> wrote: > > >>Ken Menzel wrote: >> >>>> options INVARIANT_SUPPORT >>>> >>>> nooptions WITNESS >>>> nooptions WITNESS_SKIP_SPIN >>> >>> >>>If I include GENERIC can I comment out the following? >>>#cpu I486_CPU >>>#cpu I586_CPU >>> >>>Does this make any difference? I have always done this out of >>>habit. would it become >> >>in /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/NOTES we can read : >> >># >># You must specify at least one CPU (the one you intend to run on); >># deleting the specification for CPUs you don't need to use may make >># parts of the system run faster. >># >>cpu I486_CPU >>cpu I586_CPU # aka Pentium(tm) >>cpu I686_CPU # aka Pentium Pro(tm) >> >> >> >>>nocpu I486_CPU ? >>> >>>Or is this irrelevant as the build knows what CPU I have? >> >>if the description is true, it's relevant ;) > > > Sure, but I think it's the *syntax* that matters here? > options -> nooptions / i486_cpu -> no??? > It's OK to leave GENERIC alone, but HOW are things switched off? sorry, my sentence was incomplete, I wanted to say : if the description is true, it's relevant to have this option -- Philippe PEGON
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?436A13B1.8090302>