Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:27:17 +0100
From:      Rui Paulo <rpaulo@gmail.com>
To:        Nate Eldredge <nate@thatsmathematics.com>
Cc:        Alexey Shuvaev <shuvaev@physik.uni-wuerzburg.de>, "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com>, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: genuine cpu I386_CPU kernel support
Message-ID:  <5311D83C-0DB0-4D10-B2AB-B61FD37178F7@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0909221102100.28284@zeno.ucsd.edu>
References:  <200909211203.n8LC3hhn090227@fire.js.berklix.net> <200909221027.48607.jhb@freebsd.org> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0909221102100.28284@zeno.ucsd.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 22 Sep 2009, at 19:03, Nate Eldredge wrote:

> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, John Baldwin wrote:
>
>> My comment is to just use 4.x (seriously).  A true 386 is going to  
>> be quite
>> slow and the overhead of many things added that work well on newer  
>> processors
>> is going to be very painful on a 386 (probably on a 486 as well).   
>> 4.x runs
>> fine on a 386 and should support all the hardware you can stick  
>> into a
>> machine with an 80386 CPU.
>
> Unless, of course, you plan to put it on a network.  I doubt that  
> 4.x is up to date with respect to security patches.

I don't know if they were all applied on 4.x, but I think at least the  
older ones are.

--
Rui Paulo






Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5311D83C-0DB0-4D10-B2AB-B61FD37178F7>