> Ummm, excuse me. I don't mean to burst into this conversation, but I've
> been away for a while. Let me make sure of something,
>
> We aren't SERIOUSLY considering removing 80386 support are we??? I mean,
> we better not be. Thats is one of the things that makes linux shine above
> the competition: you don't need to run it on a bleeding edge machine.
>
> I _do_ run linux on i386's, 4 of them in fact (they do some stupid
> networking functions, like DNS). I also run it on 2 486's, 4 pentium class
> and 1 pii machine.
>
> Dropping support for i386 would be, well, just plain stupid.
>
Context Context Context!
We're talking about stupid distribution issues.
Someone is moaning because you can't have a kernel that works optimally
for everyone.
I said that most dists should ship with PPRO optimized kernels (they work
on 486+ cpus).. Some people took that to mean droping i386 support. Thats
not what I ment.
Come on, if you are going to run Linux on a i386 wouldn't it be better to
stick with a dist made for that task (which would have the right kernel)?
Even if you insist on running RH 5.latest would it be so bad if you had to
download a i386 boot disk?
If i386 sopport was a big maintance consideration I'd would say drop it..
It is a speciality thing, and if keeping it were an issue it would be
better handled by a special linux dist made for small computers.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/