From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_12_24,DMARC_NONE, INVALID_DATE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from tsunx.ctn.cogs.susx.ac.uk (tsunx.ctn.cogs.susx.ac.uk [139.184.50.12]) by cvs.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 833E522E25 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 16:34:25 -0700 (MST) Received: from tsuny.ctn.cogs.susx.ac.uk [139.184.50.13] by tsunx.ctn.cogs.susx.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 1.82 #1) id 14LZRd-0006vj-00; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 23:35:17 +0000 Received: from thomasfl by tsuny.ctn.cogs.susx.ac.uk with local (Exim 1.82 #1) id 14LZRc-0001q1-00; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 23:35:16 +0000 From: Thomas Flavel To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends Message-ID: <20010124233516.E29166@tsuny.ctn.cogs.susx.ac.uk> References: <20010124152904.B3615@cvs.gentoo.org> <20010124224353.D29166@tsuny.ctn.cogs.susx.ac.uk> <20010124160851.D3615@cvs.gentoo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i In-Reply-To: <20010124160851.D3615@cvs.gentoo.org>; from drobbins@gentoo.org on Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 04:08:51PM -0700 Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed Jan 24 16:35:02 2001 X-Original-Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 23:35:16 +0000 X-Archives-Salt: b7bab8b1-a26d-4d36-97f0-51d0ad7654c5 X-Archives-Hash: a3d8cee5178d3aa91930159764e0162b On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 04:08:51PM -0700, drobbins@gentoo.org wrote: > On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 10:43:53PM +0000, Thomas Flavel wrote: > > > 1.0_rc4-pre2 is fully compatible with all modern Intel and Intel-compatible > > > processors, from the i486 on up. While 1.0_rc4-pre2 is optimized for the > > > 486, Achim plans to build several different versions of 1.0_rc4 optimized for > > > various processors. 1.0_rc4-pre2 has been tested on K6 systems and works > > > > I don't understand why not a 386? I kind of expected the distcd to be 386 > > binaries, and then to compile and install optimised to whatever my processor > > happens to be? What am I mis-understanding? ;) > > > > How would gentoo be installed on a 386? > > Very slowly. 386's and bzip2-compressed packages don't exactly get along :) :) Is it feasible to have two alternate install routes; one compiling from scratch and the other pre-compiled? > If there's a need, we can create a 386-compatible build. I'm just thinking along the lines of a minimum binary system where absolutley needed, and compiling specifically everywhere else? I realise this would be slow to install on slower systems, but, since we're all power users... ;) Seriously though, I do think this would be a nice feature, unless there's some practicality reason I'm missing. > > Excellent. Roughly what size is minimum now? > > Do you mean the minimum HD space needed for installation? I'd guess about 400Mb > of HD space. We haven't specifically attempted to "squeeze" the base install > into a minimum of space. If we did, we could probably get it to live in around > 250Mb, maybe less. If we started recompiling packages and linking them to a tiny > libc, we might be able to get this down to <100Mb :) But, since we're all power > users, this isn't something that we're focusing on right now. Ok - Tom