Re: Cyrix 6x86MX and Centaur C6 CPUs in 2.1.102

Paul Duncan (
Thu, 21 May 1998 19:32:23 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 22 May 1998, [ISO-8859-1] André Derrick Balsa wrote:
> I can live with those, and what I usually do is that I patch the kernel
> to suit my needs and tastes. That's the big advantage of GNU/GPL
> software. If you don't like it, fix it.
-> :)

> Same goes for all the bug related lines, some of which are so old that
> they only apply to 386 CPUs (and people who are still using 386s don't
> parse /proc/cpuinfo, believe me).

I get 2.87 bmips on my 386, thank you.

> I believe in making Linux simpler to use and more user-friendly. I also
[snipped some more]
> such, and I hope you guys notice that people want a simpler kernel, with
> perhaps less features and less performance, but certainly more
> stability, less undocumented code and a more user-friendly look.

simpler to user && more user-friendy != less features || less performance

Properly documented code, intuitive (and similar) API's, and either a
firmer definition of the file hierarchy or stronger conformance to FHS:
none of these would adversly affect performance or detract from our set of
features. Anybody up for some spring cleaning?

Paul Duncan			"I'm to blame;  I wonder
						 just who made the rules
"in short, all known bugs should be		 up for this game......"
 fixed, but hey, what else is new?"		   - nine inch nails -
- Linus Torvalds

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to