On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 02:35:25AM +0800, Xin LI wrote: > On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 11:27:16AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > We've already so desupported running 6-CURRENT on the original i386 > > processor, I'd rather not create the appearance that it is still > > supported and easy to do by simply defining one thing. > > Um... What about something like this: > > 200410XX: > With several performance and maintaince considerations, we are now > discouraging using newer FreeBSD on ancient hardware, e.g. 80386. > While it is still possible to define some symbols to get it ``just > work'', The problem is I don't think it is true that "it is still possible to [just] define some symbols". This commit to i386 GENERIC 3 years ago means no one has tested a kernel on a real I386 in a long time. ---------------------------- revision 1.296 date: 2001/01/14 10:11:10; author: jhb; state: Exp; lines: +2 -2 Remove I386_CPU from GENERIC. Support for the 386 seriously pessimizes performance on other x86 processors. Custom kernels can still be built that will run on the 386. ---------------------------- I remember someone tried a few years ago after this commit to get FreeBSD 5-CURRENT running on an I386 and had to hack some things to get it work. Since no one has reported success in doing this since then I'm willing to bet you dinner next time I'm in Bejing that we've broken running on real I386's w/o realizing it. -- -- David (obrien_at_FreeBSD.org)Received on Mon Oct 18 2004 - 00:20:21 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:18 UTC