Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 00:00:31 +0200 From: Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG>, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>, src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/i386/net htonl.S ntohl.S Message-ID: <20041019220031.GA98675@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20041019215007.GA13217@VARK.MIT.EDU> References: <20041019071102.GA49717@FreeBSD.org> <20041019073145.GA29746@thingy.tbd.co.nz> <20041019.084324.106215221.imp@bsdimp.com> <200410191541.54269.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20041019215007.GA13217@VARK.MIT.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 05:50:07PM -0400, David Schultz wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2004, John Baldwin wrote: > > On Tuesday 19 October 2004 10:43 am, you wrote: > > > In message: <20041019073145.GA29746@thingy.tbd.co.nz> > > > > > > Andrew Thompson <andy@fud.org.nz> writes: > > > : > I am afraid that recompiling a kernel on i386 will require several > > > : > days. > > > : > > > : Chicken and the egg. To support i386 it must be recompiled, so you would > > > : have to do it on another box anyway. > > > > > > The only people that will seriously want to use i386 these days are > > > the folks that build embedded systems. Those you have to build on > > > some host then deploy to the target system. > > Yes, and very few of those folks are likely to want a relatively > large, non-realtime, monolithic, multi-threaded OS kernel, much > less a userland that even vaguely resembles a standard FreeBSD > installation. > > Every time this issue comes up, someone points out that in fact, > FreeBSD still runs on the 80386 that they just threw out. > However, nobody ever presents an important reason for *wanting* to > run FreeBSD on an 80386. The only reason I am not running FreeBSD on an 80386 is that the PSU in my 80386sx based computer gave up a few months ago (or at least something power-related did.) Until then I was happily running 4.10-stable on it and using it as a firewall/gateway. If it was still working and support for FPU-less systems hadn't been dropped I would have upgraded it to 5-STABLE eventually (along with my main machine.) Why would I want to use such an old machine? Easy - because I had it and couldn't (and still can't) afford to buy a modern machine. I am sure I am not the only one in that position. > Nice. \me can't wait for the day when developers are no longer > required to spend time and effort to support anything older than a PPro. That day will hopefully be far in the future. Personally I don't have anything as modern as a PPro. -- <Insert your favourite quote here.> Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041019220031.GA98675>