In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nate Lawson wri tes: >On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Erik Trulsson wrote: >> The only remotely good reason I have heard for removing support for 386 >> in the default configuration is that having it in would pessimize >> performance too much for more modern CPUs. How valid that reason is I >> cannot judge, but I guess it is possible. > >Could someone enlighten me as to why we don't leave 386 support in for the >boot kernel so the floppies will at least boot? Note that performance >shouldn't be an issue when installing.
Because few if any 80386 computers have the ram it takes to run sysinstall. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
