Re: cortex / arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi (was Re: armelfp: new architecture name for an armel variant)
On 7/16/10, Martin Michlmayr <email@example.com> wrote:
> * Aurelien Jarno <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2010-07-16 09:38]:
> > BTW, has anybody thought about increasing the minimum requirement for
> > the armel port, for example to armv5? Available machines has evolved,
> > maybe the port should do the same.
> Indeed. From Paul's emails, I'm getting the feeling that moving the
> armel port to armv5 and proving optimized libraries for some things
> might be the way to go.
A company I work with is hoping to be able (finally!) to start
marketing an armv4t board we've been developing over the last years,
with Debian as the default operating system. I guess we can just
remain with lenny or squeeze...
Being the cheapest ARM boards on the market, these tend to be used by
the long tail of hobbyists, which include potential contributors to
Debian and the OS community.
So, the same question: what is the measured speed up for users of ARM
architectures >=5, and is it worth excluding the significant number of
users of armv4t boards, from using "the universal operating system"