On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 09:51:49AM +0100, Christian Brandt wrote:
> > I still have an i486sl33 machine at home. It feels faster than my 060
> > Amigas, although the 060s should be superior to the 486. So, maybe there's
> > an arch specific slow down (BE/LE)?
> [...]
> Debian uses rather generous options on its libs etcpp - which eats up
> even more memory and cpu-cycles. Eg when I dropped locale-support and
> some other "nice-to-have-but-useless" from glibc/xlib/etcpp (remember,
> that was libc5/xfree3, todays memory-bogs glibc2.x/xorg7 are even more
> prone to this) suddenly even m68k felt very fast.
>
> All in all I wouldn't be surprised if a lean m68k system GUI would feel
> three times faster and would only need half of nowadays memory. Because
> m68k has nearly nothing to do with nowaydays requirements of Debian-Targets.
Would be worth a try, eh? I mean, now as we don't release with the other
archs, we have all possibilities available:
- make it lean
- remove unneccessary packages/cruft
- get a better buildd suite (correct building of dependencies)
> >> [lots of stuff deleted, because I'm in a hurry ]
> >> I would prefer to see Debian continue to support the m68k architecture.
> >> But if it simply isn't going to happen anymore, I really think that a
> >> more focused effort,
> We shouldn't focus too much on the name "Debian" but more on
> "Debian-based-Core". In my oppinion is shouldn't be Debian dropping m68k
> but m68k dropping Debian. Take the core, develope a very-debian-close
> small distribution and voila, we are done.
Seriously, I think that would be the best option for the m68k port, given
the current political/bureaucratic situation of Debian.
What do the other think?
--
Ciao... // Fon: 0381-2744150
Ingo \X/ SIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gpg pubkey: http://www.juergensmann.de/ij/public_key.asc
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
