On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 05:06:00PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 25 April 2003 15:43, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > See the beginning of this thread; the problem is that libstdc++ has > > drawn a line between 386 and 486. > > No, the only thing that is enforced is that i386 systems cannot use the > i486+ ABI. It is a very possible solution to have use the i386 ABI on any > system and the i486+ ABI only on i686+.
That sounds contrary to what Matthias originally said: > > - Trying to "fix" this resulted in libstdc++5 packages built for > > i386 and ix86, and selecting the atomicity implementation based on > > target cpu macros. This approach doesn't work, as I learned now. > > See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2003-04/msg00394.html: It's > > not possible to mix the two implementations. > If we really want to split i386 in 'compatible' and 'fast', the i686 > border makes sense because users who care about speed probably bought the > machine during the last two years and those should be i686 compatible. I agree. -- - mdz