Re: real-i386 (was Re: i386 requalification for etch)
Nick Jacobs wrote:
> In-Reply-To=<200510091703.28199.neroden@twcny.rr.com>
>
> You mean, it's seriously been proposed that a
> significant amount of work should be done to restore
> support for a processor that has not been manufactured
> for 10 years? While slightly degrading performance for
> the 99.99999% of x86 users who have Pentium/Athlon/or
> better?
Maybe renaming Debians "i386" into something more accurate like "x86" or
even "IA32" (in consistency with IA64) would suppress discussions like this
in the future?
Kind reagards
Bastian
Reply to: