On 1 Jun 1997, Kai Henningsen wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Galen Hazelwood) wrote on 31.05.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Christian Schwarz wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 29 May 1997, Galen Hazelwood wrote: > > > > (Don't ask me what the historical reasons are, though. I might start to > > > > whimper...) > > > > > > Sorry, but I couldn't resist :-) What are the reasons? > > > > I don't know. That's why I whimper... > > > > > If we make this policy, we should have some real arguments for it! Since > > > we use "i386" in all our file names and since Debian actually runs on > > > 386SX and higher I don't see why we should label this "i486". > > > > Perhaps. Anybody have any serious arguments? I think the reason we > > configure gcc as i486 is so it automatically optimizes for the 486; it's > > a good middle ground. > > That may be the reason that Linux gcc is usually configured that way. > > The reason Debian does it, AFAIR, is simply to be compatible with most of > the Linux world.
Where is the arch specification string used, i.e. what will break if we change it to be "i386-linux" on intel systems? Thanks, Chris -- _,, Christian Schwarz / o \__ [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], ! ___; [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / \\\______/ ! PGP-fp: 8F 61 EB 6D CF 23 CA D7 34 05 14 5C C8 DC 22 BA \ / http://fatman.mathematik.tu-muenchen.de/~schwarz/ -.-.,---,-,-..---,-,-.,----.-.- "DIE ENTE BLEIBT DRAUSSEN!" -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .