From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 8 02:11:53 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 403C716A420 for ; Tue, 8 Nov 2005 02:11:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from shurd@sasktel.net) Received: from misav01.sasknet.sk.ca (misav01.sasknet.sk.ca [142.165.20.162]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A263243D46 for ; Tue, 8 Nov 2005 02:11:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from shurd@sasktel.net) Received: from bgmpomr1.sasknet.sk.ca ([142.165.72.22]) by misav01 with InterScan Messaging Security Suite; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 20:11:51 -0600 Received: from backoffice ([206.163.248.56]) by bgmpomr1.sasknet.sk.ca (SaskTel eMessaging Service) with ESMTPA id <0IPM00MPW63RYE10@bgmpomr1.sasknet.sk.ca> for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 20:11:51 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 20:11:41 -0600 From: Stephen Hurd To: Joel Hatton , Craig Boston , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-id: <002e01c5e409$c29dd790$5200a8c0@backoffice> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; reply-type=original Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <200511080205.jA825Dbl046080@app.auscert.org.au> Cc: Subject: Re: 5.x, 6.x and CPUTYPE X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 02:11:53 -0000 > >> >> I always build my production servers with CPUTYPE=i686 so they can be >> transplanted to any machine with a PPro or better processor (or even >> qemu if necessary). > > Thanks, Craig. I'm glad to hear that I'm not alone in pursuing this > method. > Do you know of any particular disadvantages of continuing with this > less-than-optimised model - I guess I mean, is this something that is > likely to break or become uneconomical at some point? For packages, it's a good idea to make a build jail... in case of static linking goodness. I had packages bite me when I was building them all on a system with a CPUTYPE=p3 world.