Le lundi 25 mai 2009 à 15:03 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit : > "J.A. Bezemer" <costar@wormhole.robuust.nl> writes: > > > On Sun, 24 May 2009, Bastian Blank wrote: > > > >> Hi folks > >> > >> I would like to raise the minimum CPU requirement for the shipped Linux > >> kernels in the i386 port to i686 (with cmov). > > [..] > > > > Popcon gives us some rough numbers to think about: > > > > linux-image-2.6-686 49518 > > linux-image-2.6-486 6191 > > > > Given that the installer's automatic kernel choice tends to be accurate, > > we've got quite some non-cmov users. Actually, i386 has got many more > > non-cmov users than any non-i386/amd64 architecture has _in total_: > > > > linux-image-2.6-ixp4xx 772 (=arm/armel) > > linux-image-2.6-powerpc 551 > > linux-image-2.6-sparc64 192 > > linux-image-2.6-orion5x 106 (=arm/armel) > > (rest <100) > > > > #include <popcon-accuracy-disclaimer.h> > > > > So, the good work you're doing to keep supporting arm/powerpc/sparc/etc. > > will actually benefit much less users than the number you'll be annoying > > when you drop i386 non-cmov ... > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Anne Bezemer > > And how many people with such low power systems do run popcon? How > many use a custom kernel? You're right, most of them don't. This just means that the stat is not representative, but just a lower bound. I personally have an i486, without popcon. In addition, think about poor countries in Africa or Asia, you will probably find a large market of old hardware. So please keep this support. Cheers, Mazen,
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=