Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 07:11:02 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: David O'Brien <obrien@freebsd.org>, Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org>, cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/i386/net htonl.S ntohl.S Message-ID: <20041019071102.GA49717@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20041018183118.GA80703@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> References: <200410181719.i9IHJa9l097436@repoman.freebsd.org> <20041018173516.GB89681@ip.net.ua> <20041018174511.GA6079@dragon.nuxi.com> <20041018183118.GA80703@falcon.midgard.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 08:31:18PM +0200, Erik Trulsson wrote: > I think you people need to decide to either drop support for 80386 > completely (in which case all the '#ifdef I386_CPU' and similar can go > away) or decide to keep support for it, in which case most things > should just work 'out of the box' on a 80386 (without recompilation > needed more than absolutely necessary.) I don't really see your point; what's wrong with having support for i386, just being hidden behind the need to tweak some things (i.e. to recompile a custom kernel)? Methinks that we can expect certain level of competence of someone who is willing to install FreeBSD-5 on i386, definitely being able to rebuild a kernel (which is actually pretty easy to do compared to Linux, for me at least). There's also an option of putting GENERIC-386 next to GENERIC config file in /sys/i386/conf. Just my $.02. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041019071102.GA49717>