Re: Increasing minimum 'i386' processor
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 01:58:53PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 08:48:08PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Would it be worth adding a lintian check for instructions that may not
> > be supported (bearing in mind that a fair few packages will need to
> > override it)?
> I've wanted this for a while, but haven't been sure how to go about it. I
> would even favor making this an overrideable archive reject tag, for use of
> cmov outside of a hwcap directory.
> Something similar on armel (armv4t vs. armv7) and powerpc (altivec) would
> probably be worthwhile.
... and that will fail to find the legitimate uses that are conditional
on the appropriate hardware support at runtime.