From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EAtxv-0004jZ-Qv for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:39:12 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j81Ia2Nr018989; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 18:36:02 GMT Received: from mail.max-t.com (h216-18-124-229.gtcust.grouptelecom.net [216.18.124.229]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j81IYMSM025248 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 18:34:22 GMT Received: from cocagne.max-t.internal ([192.168.1.124]) by mail.max-t.com with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1EAtvX-0003hz-V3 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 14:36:50 -0400 From: Olivier Crete <tester@gentoo.org> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20050901190259.31d68edd@snowdrop.home> References: <20050901171028.GW18440@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> <200509011923.58239@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <20050901184101.5ed8cadc@snowdrop.home> <200509011950.24494@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <20050901190259.31d68edd@snowdrop.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Organization: Gentoo Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 14:36:44 -0400 Message-Id: <1125599804.15722.18.camel@cocagne.max-t.internal> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.168.1.124 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tester@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on mx.max-t.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.1+cvs (built Fri, 14 Jan 2005 20:35:17 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail.max-t.com) X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by robin.gentoo.org id j81IYMSM025248 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id j81Ia2PP018989 X-Archives-Salt: f76c3465-0651-4e5e-bfb7-ad427ce0b3a0 X-Archives-Hash: 80ac5d1c431084f2f9cf2de85b660489 On Thu, 2005-01-09 at 19:02 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 19:50:11 +0200 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten=C3=B2" > <flameeyes@gentoo.org> wrote: > | On Thursday 01 September 2005 19:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > | > Untrue. > | > | Can I have reasoning? >=20 > Take a look at how sparc and mips currently handle packages which will > run on some CPU kinds or ABIs but not others. Is it just me, it seems that only sparc/mips devs want that kind of change and non none of the x86/amd64 devs...=20 I still dont see what practical advantage that would bring to x86/amd64 users or developers?=20 --=20 Olivier Cr=C3=AAte tester@gentoo.org Gentoo Developer x86 Security Liaison --=20 gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list