Re: Proposal to Drop Fedora 12 Features
On Thursday 16 July 2009 20:25:36 Jon Ciesla wrote: On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:11 PM, John Poelstrapoels...@redhat.com wrote: Hi FESCo, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XZRpmPayloads https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F12X86Support Afaik those are blocking on 1) xz review request 2) rel-eng to coordinate a mass rebuild Has anyone taken concrete steps for a i586 secondary arch yet? For the most part, its not (yet) necessary. We throttled back the definition of i686 from i686 + cmov + sse2 or some such to just i686 + cmov, so there are very few systems that would be served by an i586 secondary arch right now. i.e., Athlon XP, Pentium III, etc., which *would* have been relegated to i586, are still going to be supported by i686, and we've talked about adding a cmov trap-and-emu function to keep supporting the few i686 procs w/o cmov, which really leaves only the original Pentium series that would benefit from an i586 secondary arch. At least, that's my vague recollection of it all right now... :) -- Jarod Wilson ja...@redhat.com -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Proposal to Drop Fedora 12 Features
Jarod Wilson wrote: On Thursday 16 July 2009 20:25:36 Jon Ciesla wrote: On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:11 PM, John Poelstrapoels...@redhat.com wrote: Hi FESCo, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XZRpmPayloads https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F12X86Support Afaik those are blocking on 1) xz review request 2) rel-eng to coordinate a mass rebuild Has anyone taken concrete steps for a i586 secondary arch yet? For the most part, its not (yet) necessary. We throttled back the definition of i686 from i686 + cmov + sse2 or some such to just i686 + cmov, so there are very few systems that would be served by an i586 secondary arch right now. i.e., Athlon XP, Pentium III, etc., which *would* have been relegated to i586, are still going to be supported by i686, and we've talked about adding a cmov trap-and-emu function to keep supporting the few i686 procs w/o cmov, which really leaves only the original Pentium series that would benefit from an i586 secondary arch. At least, that's my vague recollection of it all right now... :) If this is the case, which is what I was hoping I remembered, then I agree with you that we don't *really* need it. Bill, can you clarify the sse2 or no sse2 distinction, and possibly on the wiki page as well, since it was such a large thread? :) It's a shame to end old hardware support, as it's always been one of my favourite things about Linux in general, but if I ever have any of that sort of hardware, I can make do. . . -- in your fear, speak only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Proposal to Drop Fedora 12 Features
Bill Nottingham wrote: Jon Ciesla (l...@jcomserv.net) said: If this is the case, which is what I was hoping I remembered, then I agree with you that we don't *really* need it. Bill, can you clarify the sse2 or no sse2 distinction, and possibly on the wiki page as well, since it was such a large thread? :) It doesn't require sse2. Emulating CMOV requires someone to merge that patch, which wasn't a committed part of the feature and no one has done that yet, AFAIK. Bill Yay! Thanks. happydance -- in your fear, speak only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Proposal to Drop Fedora 12 Features
On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 10:00 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: John Poelstra (poels...@redhat.com) said: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XZRpmPayloads https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F12X86Support Both updated now. Apologies for the dlay. Bill A possibly stupid question: The above page states that the flags will be -march=i686 -mtune=atom on i386, but a build I just did in rawhide has -march=i686 -mtune=generic so -march has changed but -mtune hasn't? -- Jussi Lehtola Fedora Project Contributor jussileht...@fedoraproject.org -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Proposal to Drop Fedora 12 Features
A possibly stupid question: The above page states that the flags will be -march=i686 -mtune=atom on i386, but a build I just did in rawhide has -march=i686 -mtune=generic so -march has changed but -mtune hasn't? What version of redhat-rpm-config was in the buildroot? (You should be able to pull this from one of the log files.) Bill -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Proposal to Drop Fedora 12 Features
Bill Nottingham (nott...@redhat.com) said: A possibly stupid question: The above page states that the flags will be -march=i686 -mtune=atom on i386, but a build I just did in rawhide has -march=i686 -mtune=generic so -march has changed but -mtune hasn't? What version of redhat-rpm-config was in the buildroot? (You should be able to pull this from one of the log files.) Actually, looking myself: DEBUG util.py:256: redhat-rpm-confignoarch9.0.3-9.fc12 build 56 k So, your build started before the buildroot had been regenerated with the new redhat-rpm-config package. Later builds such as http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/packages/libev/3.70/2.fc12/data/logs/i686/build.log) pull in the new redhat-rpm-config, and get the flags set. (And no, I wouldn't worry about a rebuild just for that.) Bill -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Proposal to Drop Fedora 12 Features
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:11 PM, John Poelstrapoels...@redhat.com wrote: Hi FESCo, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XZRpmPayloads https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F12X86Support Afaik those are blocking on 1) xz review request 2) rel-eng to coordinate a mass rebuild -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Proposal to Drop Fedora 12 Features
d == drago01 drag...@gmail.com writes: d Afaik those are blocking on xz review request rel-eng to coordinate d a mass rebuild The xz review had stalled; notting asked me to step in but somehow it slipped my mind for a day. I just went ahead and took it over; there are a couple of things to look at but it should all be wrapped up tomorrow if notting's around. - J -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
