On Sat, 2004-10-23 at 18:35 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 11:34:50AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
[...]
> > If someone from the kernel or glibc team had access to a real 386, we
> > might be able to make (userspace) support work. Would it be possible to
> > get access t
Am 2004-10-22 11:34:50, schrieb Andres Salomon:
> If someone from the kernel or glibc team had access to a real 386, we
> might be able to make (userspace) support work. Would it be possible to
> get access to this machine?
Need a i80386 Mainboard ?
I have one runing NetBSD :-) with 4 MB of mem
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 11:34:50AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 00:31 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > Has the current image compiled the patch in? (I haven't checked
> > that yet)
>
> Yes, it does.
>
> > If yes, there should be no problem at all to implement this solut
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 00:31 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 06:01:31PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > The kernel team is considering dropping 386 support (the 80386
> > processor, not the i386 arch) from Debian. Currently, in order to
> > support
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 06:01:31PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> The kernel team is considering dropping 386 support (the 80386
> processor, not the i386 arch) from Debian. Currently, in order to
> support 386, we include a 486 emulation patch (the patch can be viewed
[...]
> Comment
peter green wrote:
> what about changing the 486 emulation kernel patch so that it completely
> disables itself on non 386 processors
Did you read the patch? I thougth that was already the case from how
it is invoked.
> this way it would only have security issues on pure 386 which wouldn't be
>
L PROTECTED]
> Sent: 04 October 2004 14:33
> To: Peter Green
> Cc: Adeodato Simó; debian-kernel@lists.debian.org;
> debian-release@lists.debian.org; debian-boot@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Dropping 386 support
>
>
> peter green wrote:
> > calling stuff i386 when it wi
peter green wrote:
> calling stuff i386 when it will not run natively on a 386 seems like asking
> for confustion to me
True, but we're way to close to a release to fix *that*. And I'm not
sure that we could easily fix binary-i386 at all..
> why and when was this instruction emulation needed in
On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 07:54:12PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > The d-i images really need to be built from kernel-image packages that
> > are in the archive at the time we ship. Optimizing for 486 isn't a very
> > good reason on its own to force another kernel build cycle.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 03 October 2004 23:19
> To: debian-kernel@lists.debian.org; debian-release@lists.debian.org;
> debian-boot@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Dropping 386 support
>
>
> * Joey Hess [Sun, 03 Oct 2004 12:54:21 -0400]:
> > Andres Salomon wrote:
> > >
Steve Langasek wrote:
> The d-i images really need to be built from kernel-image packages that
> are in the archive at the time we ship. Optimizing for 486 isn't a very
> good reason on its own to force another kernel build cycle.
I had not even considered the impact of changing the optimisation,
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 12:19:16AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Joey Hess [Sun, 03 Oct 2004 12:54:21 -0400]:
> > Andres Salomon wrote:
> > > Given d-i's memory requirements, and the fact that you'd be hard-pressed
> > > to find a (desktop) 386 system with more than 16 megs of memory, I don't
> >
* Joey Hess [Sun, 03 Oct 2004 12:54:21 -0400]:
> Andres Salomon wrote:
> > Given d-i's memory requirements, and the fact that you'd be hard-pressed
> > to find a (desktop) 386 system with more than 16 megs of memory, I don't
> > consider debian 3.1 to be a viable candidate for installing onto a 386
Andres Salomon wrote:
> Given d-i's memory requirements, and the fact that you'd be hard-pressed
> to find a (desktop) 386 system with more than 16 megs of memory, I don't
> consider debian 3.1 to be a viable candidate for installing onto a 386.
> Also, note that if we do drop 386 support, I will r
Andres Salomon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The kernel team is considering dropping 386 support (the 80386
> processor, not the i386 arch) from Debian. Currently, in order to
> support 386, we include a 486 emulation patch (the patch can be viewed
> from here:
> <http://svn.debian.
On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 08:55:24AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Reasons for dropping 386 support are as follows:
> > * d-i currently requires at least 20 megs of ram to install. My 386
> > had 4 megs of ram, which required using lowmem w/ potato's installer. I
> &
Andres Salomon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The kernel team is considering dropping 386 support (the 80386
> processor, not the i386 arch) from Debian. Currently, in order to
> support 386, we include a 486 emulation patch (the patch can be viewed
> from here:
> <http://svn.debian.
Hi,
The kernel team is considering dropping 386 support (the 80386
processor, not the i386 arch) from Debian. Currently, in order to
support 386, we include a 486 emulation patch (the patch can be viewed
from here:
<http://svn.debian.org/viewcvs/kernel/trunk/kernel/source/kernel-source-2.
18 matches
Mail list logo
