Peter Wemm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1: it removes the 486-and-above code from the 386-only cases.
> 2: it removes the runtime conditionals that everybody currently executes
>if I386_CPU is present
> 3: prevents people shooting themselves in the foot at 'make depend' stage
>if they acc
On 2001-Jan-15 00:08:12 -0800, Peter Wemm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The patch below does this:
>http://people.freebsd.org/~peter/i386_cleanup.diff
...
>To be clear: THIS DOES NOT REMOVE i386 SUPPORT! It will actually slightly
>improve i386 runtime speed by removing the useless conditional test
Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>
>
> On 15 Jan 2001 01:38:00 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
>
> > I'm tempted to suggest that the freebsd-small and / or PicoBSD gang
> > would be the right people to ask to maintain i386 support in FreeBSD.
>
> Guys, was Matt Dillon's suggestion infeasible? Can't we
On 15 Jan 2001 01:38:00 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> I'm tempted to suggest that the freebsd-small and / or PicoBSD gang
> would be the right people to ask to maintain i386 support in FreeBSD.
Guys, was Matt Dillon's suggestion infeasible? Can't we keep CPU_I386
support and just make i
I'm tempted to suggest that the freebsd-small and / or PicoBSD gang
would be the right people to ask to maintain i386 support in FreeBSD.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
> >Sorry Poul, I think the question here is: "if we decide to remove i386 support
> >BUT a few people still want to use it and can maintain it as a separate
> >platform port, is it an option to do so, from a technical point of view?"
> >
> (This is a general answer, not just about i386 support:)
>
:If nobody has the hardware to test it on, *and* the inclination
:to do so, it will not get tested, and the code will erode as a
:result.
:
:I have a 386SX/20 CPU, but I'll be damned if I can be bothered
:to boot FreeBSD-current on it, in fact it didn't even boot
:a 4.x last I tried.
:
:Any featur
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andrea Campi writes:
>> >> I think it's the time to throw i386 over the railing and lower the
>> >> waterline a fair bit on -current.
>> >
>> >Does it make any sense at all to make 80386 a separate platform
>> >a'la pc98/alpha/ia64? Do enough people care about it?
>
