On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 02:59:44AM +0000, peter green wrote: > On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 09:06:44AM -0500, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > >That sounds like if the mpg123 package should use: > >on armel: --with-cpu=arm_nofpu > >on armhf: --with-cpu=arm_fpu > > > > > >Does this make sense to everybody? > Seems sane to me. armv7 devices without neon are relatively uncommon > so while it's important that they are supported it's IMO not vitally > important to squeeze out every last drop of performance from them. > I wonder what we should use on raspbian? I haven't tested on a Pi > yet but it seems that on all tests i've seen so-far the generic fpu > code is quite a bit slower than the arm nofpu code. Is there any > quality difference from using a fpu vs nonfpu decoder? If so how > much performance degredation do you beleive should be accepted in > exchange for that quality improvement.
I think nofpu would good for raspian. Any lost audio quality would unnoticable on the Rasberry's analog audio output ;) Peter, what's the recommended way to recognize raspbian in debian/rules ? Riku -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140305093430.gb16...@afflict.kos.to
