Re: cortex / arm-hardfloat-linux-gnueabi (was Re: armelfp: new architecture name for an armel variant)
Martin Guy a écrit :
> On 7/16/10, Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com> wrote:
>> * Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> [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"
> Debian?
I was not aware of that. If they are some real users of an armv4t port,
we should probably keep it.
--
Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
aurelien@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Reply to: