On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Tomas Mraz <tm...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 11:42 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > Chris Adams (cmad...@hiwaay.net) said: > > > Removing support for still-functional hardware is a trademark of > > > Microsoft, not Linux. > > > > > > I'd also argue that doing another full rebuild of the OS for a 1% > > > performance gain on a single architecture is not a particularly > > > production use of resources. > > > > The 1% comes from i586 -> i686; SSE2 would be additional on top of > > that. But given the vehement opposition, I can see dropping the SSE2 > > requirement. I'm still fairly convinced that going to i686 is the right > > move - we really don't support i586 as a practical matter, and even > > the Geode should still work with that. Furthermore, it's likely we'll > > have a mass rebuild for LZMA support and/or debuginfo changes, so it's > > no additional cost. > > Great, i686 without SSE(2) seems OK to me. I even wonder why we did not > go to that requirement in F11 already without the intermediate ~i586 > requirement. > > -- > Tomas Mraz > No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back. > Turkish proverb > > Because Pentium II and lower support i586 arch.
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list