[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: i386 compatibility & libstdc++



* Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@gwolf.cx> [030426 22:29]:
> > > >>> 1a. create a stripped down version for i386, i.e. required/important
> > > >>>     and go for i486.
> > > >> Is there much performance improvement in dropping i386 in favour of i486+?
> > > 
> > > > - Integrated math coprocessor ( why does libc still check for its
> > > > availability? ) [...]
> > > 
> > > 486SX.
> > 
> > I thought that in-kernel emulation would have solved the gap between 486
> > DX and SX.
> 
> For practical purposes, yes... Although emulated FP is really, REALLY
> slow. I installed a machine to be a X terminal about two years ago -
> 386SX, 8MB RAM. It worked fine, yes... But MUCH slower than a
> similarly-configured machine with a hardware FP unit, to the point of
> deciding it would be a text terminal, with no X :)

I agree completely -- in todays world of CPU's capable of many millions
of FP operations/s you really don't want a 486SX.  

However, in the context of our conversation it makes no difference that
the performance sucks.  A 486 is a 486 as far as a Debian package is
concerned.  We don't need to consider the 486SX when deciding where the
architecture split should be.

B.

-- 
				WebSig: http://www.jukie.net/~bart/sig/

Attachment: pgpzFbBjZy7gw.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: