Re: i386 compatibility & libstdc++
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Friday 25 April 2003 15:43, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 01:37:04PM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote:
> > Hmm... I'd argue for putting the split at either 386 vs 486+ (the latter
> > at least has a math copro and CMPXCHG), or at 386-pentium vs 686+.
> See the beginning of this thread; the problem is that libstdc++ has drawn a
> line between 386 and 486.
No, the only thing that is enforced is that i386 systems cannot use the i486+
ABI. It is a very possible solution to have use the i386 ABI on any system and
the i486+ ABI only on i686+.
That will however mean that third party software using libstdc++5 with the i486
ABI won't work will not work on systems with an instruction set older than
i686. It's a compromise, but I think it's still better than forcing everyone
on the i486 compatibility that is just as obsolete as i386 (i.e. you won't
buy any _new_ i486 machines in order to run Debian).
If we really want to split i386 in 'compatible' and 'fast', the i686 border
makes sense because users who care about speed probably bought the machine
during the last two years and those should be i686 compatible.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----