At Tue, 18 Jan 2005 22:09:03 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 05:52:04PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > > > > > Yes, and if ev67 is instruction upper compatible with ev56 (I > > > > > guess so), I think it's acceptable to add a symlink "ln -sf > > > > > lib/ev67/libfoo.so lib/ev56/libfoo.so". > > > > > > > > Ugh... that pushes the burden of maitaining support for new > > > > architectures to the package. > > > > Yeah - I think it's trade off - whether we support library > > optimization package or we don't get a bit performance improvement. > > So, you are trading maintainance cost for a rather subjective speed > improvent? Or should I say, preventing some performance degradation?
The reason why I don't try to clear hwcap issue in documentation is: I don't want to battle to someone about this kind of issue. Buying new hardware improves performance. I don't reply any more. Regards, -- gotom -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
