adam.keys@engr.smu.edu said:
> I was thinking of starting with a modern machine for developing/
> compiling on, and then older machine(s) for testing. This way I
> would not risk losing data if I oops or somesuch.
With journalling filesystems you needn't worry _too_ much about losing
data; depending of course on what you're hacking on. Having two separate
boxen for development and testing is mostly valuable because you can keep
working when you break it - it doesn't take your entire desktop environment
down with it.
adam.keys@engr.smu.edu said:
> Which brings me to the final question. Is there any reason to choose
> architecture A over architecture B for any reason besides
> arch-specific development in the kernel or for device drivers?
If you're developing device drivers and have the choice, pick something
esoteric to enforce good behaviour. Something which does out-of-order
stores, has non-cache-coherent DMA, is big-endian and preferably 64-bit. I
think both mips64 and sparc64 boards can meet all those criteria - if not,
get as close as you can.
-- dwmw2- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 07 2001 - 21:00:35 EST