Re: i386 compatibility & libstdc++
On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 08:15:05PM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
| On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 05:06:00PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
| > 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.
| i686 has been common for 6 years now (1997 P2/K6), so its hardly just in
| the past two years. ;) I agree the split should be at the i686 border
| assuming this doesn't harm athlon systems.
What about the Via C3? That was introduced not too long ago, runs
moderately quickly (~1GHz) with low power consumption, but IIRC doesn't
support the i686 instruction set.