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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GXO4W-0000Yz-UI for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 20:19:29 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k9AKISNo029244; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 20:18:28 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9AKGF0K016271 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 20:16:15 GMT Received: from netswarm.net (netswarm.net [212.55.200.138]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88AF26474D for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 20:16:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from netswarm.net (joker@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by netswarm.net (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id k9AKGAHC010314 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 22:16:10 +0200 Received: (from joker@localhost) by netswarm.net (8.13.7/8.13.7/Submit) id k9AKGAIm010313 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 22:16:10 +0200 Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 22:16:10 +0200 From: Christian Birchinger To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Missing: Universal-CD - Gentoo discriminates shell and networkless users Message-ID: <20061010201610.GA10015@netswarm.net> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <45256BE9.9030601@gentoo.org> <45260819.7040203@gentoo.org> <1160143601.10578.7.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> <20061009101111.6fb6f65f@localhost> <452A0A80.4080407@gentoo.org> <1160398042.10496.16.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> <1160419368.6362.5.camel@party.homenetwork> <1160423118l.10540l.4l@spike> <1160431074.6362.9.camel@party.homenetwork> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Accepted-File-Formats: ASCII, .ps, .rtf, .pdf - *NO* Micosoft Office files please X-Info: No HTML mails please. text/plain is the official email format Organization: Gentoo Linux User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: 2920843b-f303-4aa9-b0ef-bd63074acd73 X-Archives-Hash: 60cc09b155c5f7ab7b75cb9ea404c87d On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 10:13:41AM +0000, Duncan wrote: > Personally, I'd say 686 is the lowest reasonable to support at this point. > Below that, try an appropriate binary distribution and save the days/weeks > of compiling. Of course, Gentoo is highly customizable, and folks could > try it on 386 if they wanted, but I don't believe it's worth supporting > below 686 at this point. That's personally. I'm sure there are folks > that would argue we should at least support 586, but I simply don't > believe it's worth it. There are CPUs like VIA C3 which don't have support for cmov and i think gcc asumes that cmov is present if march is i686. Don't know if this changed now. I wouldn't like if i couldn't install Gentoo on my 800Mhz C3 machines anymore because something like -march=i686 is being used. Maybe it's a radical point of view but i think generic i386 or maybe i486 binaries are enough for a boot CD and stages. Almost everyone will rebuild the stuff anyway. And i don't think there's a huge speed loss until the binaries are rebuilt. Christian -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list