>> Removing support for still-functional hardware is a trademark of >> Microsoft, not Linux. >> >> I'd also argue that doing another full rebuild of the OS for a 1% >> performance gain on a single architecture is not a particularly >> production use of resources. > > The 1% comes from i586 -> i686; SSE2 would be additional on top of > that. But given the vehement opposition, I can see dropping the SSE2 > requirement. I'm still fairly convinced that going to i686 is the right > move - we really don't support i586 as a practical matter, and even > the Geode should still work with that. Furthermore, it's likely we'll > have a mass rebuild for LZMA support and/or debuginfo changes, so it's > no additional cost. When I ran Fedora 10 on my Fit-PC I would run a i686 kernel openssl without issue but yum wouldn't see it as an update because the arch didn't match so I'd have to manually download it and install it with 'rpm -i --ignorearch kernel' so I presume there would have to be changes to at least rpm to override the fact that its i586 + cmov as opposed to officially being i686. Peter -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
