Re: real-i386 (was Re: i386 requalification for etch)
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 12:10:05PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Andrew M.A. Cater <amacater@galactic.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> [...]
> > Up until the change in GCC which effectively
> > changed Debian compatibility to 486 processors and above, Debian
> > supported the 386 processor. There was a lot of talking on the lists
> > at the time and it was agreed that this was a bad situation and also
> > that we shouldn't rename.
>
> > GCC has changed again: full support for the Intel 386 is now possible
> > again but at the cost of some work. I still have three machines (two
> > laptops and a very old desktop) that have genuine Intel 386 inside -
> > but they are old. Some of the VIA chips don't play well with 586/686
> > optimisations (including potentially all the C3 derivatives)
> [...]
>
> I am a little bit confused. Does Via/C3 need strict 386-instructions
> or does it play nicely with the current status, i.e. 486 instruction
> set?
The C3 <= Ezra supports the 686 instruction set; only conditional moves,
which are an optional 686 feature, are missing (so from the instruction set
point of view i486 is no problem at all).
--
c u
henning
Reply to: