Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 14:04:07 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> To: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf GENERIC Message-ID: <200101142104.f0EL47s12706@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 14 Jan 2001 03:15:11 PST." <200101141115.f0EBFBQ89810@mobile.wemm.org> References: <200101141115.f0EBFBQ89810@mobile.wemm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200101141115.f0EBFBQ89810@mobile.wemm.org> Peter Wemm writes: : The bottom line is that I feel the time is just about right to yank i386 : entirely, not just taking it out of GENERIC. But I wont push for that : (yet :-). But ending the expensive runtime cost of i386 support in : GENERIC is well overdue I feel. The cost of slowing down copyin()/copyout() : etc is just not worth it. We at Timing Solutions run FreeBSD in an embedded way. We usually burn CF "disks" with a custom script, and then boot from there. We've found 4.x performs really well on 486 class of hardware (we're using AMD 133MHz parts). We've also run it on 386 hardware fairly successfully as well, but that SBC is giving way to a 486 one so I don't know if we'll have a requirement for continuing 386 support or not. On those products that we have that don't need it, we certainly do try to remove it from the kernel configs. Then again, we also tend to remove everything we don't absolutely need for the product from the config as well, given the contrained nature of the hardware that we run on. So I guess this is a long way of saying that I'd help resist 386 support being removed completely, but I have no problems with it out of GENERIC. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200101142104.f0EL47s12706>