Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté : > > In any case we need to make clear if we allow 486 optimisation that > > are not i386 compatible or not. > What about perusing the INT 6 idea, and going all the way up to i686? > As i686 is already like ten(?) years old, I would say 99.9% [1] machines > that run sarge are 686 and higher -- thus, moving to i686-specific > optimizations would be good for the vast majority of users (this comes > from someone who set up two servers on P MMX two weeks ago :p) > > If speed on archaic machines is an issue, you can always use the > wonderful piece of software called apt-build.
You said that "if speed on archaic machines is an issue, you can always use the wonderful piece of software called apt-build.". You replied to a message that asked "if we allow 486 optimisation that are not i386 are not i386 compatible or not". It's not a matter of harmless optimisation (nobody will object about that) but of incompatible optimisation. Are you proposing to make Debian for i*86 a distribution incompatible with < i686? If so, are you kidding? The Pentium classic (i586) was still available in 1997. I know a lot of person who use a Pentium classic as mini-server, with is really enough to run a local network. Also P MMX seems meaningless to me. MMX was, I think, introduced in Pentium Pro (which is still a i586 according to uname) and nowadays computers still got MMX (so what is the meaning of P MMX? PPro? PII? PIII? PIV?). And, what do you mean by higher than i686? i64? Skipping 386 for 486 seems acceptable because nowadays, a distro requires more HD space and RAM than it's possible to add with usual 386 motherboards, but dropping all Pentiums until Pentium II generation seems completely foolish. I hope I misunderstood your message. > [1] 90% of statistics are made up on the spot. 90% of meaningless statistics, you mean? -- Mathieu Roy Homepage: http://yeupou.coleumes.org Not a native english speaker: http://stock.coleumes.org/doc.php?i=/misc-files/flawed-english