> My reasoning is that who uses a 386 is not interested in speed, so a little > bit more slowness is not that bad. > > You realize that the alternative for distributions is to drop 386 support > completely? Rubbish. Mandrake and Red Hat have been shipping multiple kernel images, multiple gzips and multiple glibc's for a very long time. It is quite simply not a problem. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- x86 cpu configuration (was: Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores... Jeff Garzik
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Andi Kleen
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Alan Cox
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Andi Kleen
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix David Weinehall
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Andi Kleen
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix David Weinehall
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Andi Kleen
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Alan Cox
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Andi Kleen
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Andi Kleen
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Alan Cox
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix H. Peter Anvin
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Alan Cox
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix H. Peter Anvin
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix Alan Cox
- Re: [PATCH] i386 rw_semaphores fix H. Peter Anvin