Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Jul 1997 15:33:41 -0600 (MDT) | From | Teunis Peters <> | Subject | Re: Kernel cpu selection |
| |
On Fri, 18 Jul 1997, Mike Jagdis wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, Aaron Tiensivu wrote: > > > Coming up in the kernel, I think the whole chip definition section should > > be overhauled into some type of sassy multi-selection deal. > > This is excessive. You don't need this level of detail and putting > processor options into config rather than looking at the processor > type at run time makes portable kernel images tricky. Anyway my > non-Intel patch does something along these lines.
I think this kind of detail is _GOOD_! (priorities in terms of importance to _ME_ :)
1. It means the patches for Cyrix can FINALLY be in kernel! [I use this neeto patch that stablizes my system nicely when I'm running flaky hardware (50% time), but I need to manually patch it in...] 2. People with 'special needs' (non-intel CPU's :) can have easier time ...Was thinking of compiling linux for 68030 Powerbook but changed mind when I couldn't figure out how..... 3. And hey, who says intel's won the CPU wars... I mean, AMD could end up the new CPU leader... or even... DEC???
It'd be NICE to see Alpha series processors as basic home computer <g>. But how much change to kernel? Not much, really. Just fix the [Make/Model] selection on CPU..... (I think) .. specially since DEC is at war with Intel, and DEC is allying with Cyrix and AMD....
Or at least this would make a nice goal. And it doesn't affect kernel _SIZE_ any... Just stability in some situations and portability ['specially with those nice config scripts].
this IS a good idea!
Have a nice day :) - Teunis
| |