Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 15 Dec 2005 07:58:26 +0100
From:      Stijn Hoop <stijn@win.tue.nl>
To:        Mike Jakubik <mikej@rogers.com>
Cc:        stable@freebsd.org, Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz>
Subject:   Re: kernel cpu entries
Message-ID:  <20051215065826.GY912@pcwin002.win.tue.nl>
In-Reply-To: <43A0FC61.3060704@rogers.com>
References:  <20051215002618.B4D3B5D07@ptavv.es.net> <43A0E607.2030101@alumni.rice.edu> <43A0E916.7070204@samsco.org> <43A0EC9F.9080800@paradise.net.nz> <43A0FC61.3060704@rogers.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:17:21AM -0500, Mike Jakubik wrote:
> Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> >Is a minor update to the handbook needed in order avoid confusion 
> >then? e.g. I have been commenting out CPU_I586 on all my PIII systems 
> >in the (mistaken it would seem) belief that having CPU_I686 only was 
> >better.
> 
> Agreed, i have always just used I686, assuming it inherited the features 
> of I586. I think most people will assume this.

I did.

(just another datapoint)

--Stijn

-- 
"I used to think I was indecisive, but now I'm not so sure."



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051215065826.GY912>