On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 01:39:50AM -0400, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > I _swear_ this is _not_ meant to be argumentative. :) okay. > But you mention "mainstream." What does that mean? > If it means "more popular," I'm not sure that's a good term. > Because there are a _crapload_ of these systems out there > (literally millions, probably 30% already running Linux). Sure, but they're by their nature not normal desktop systems -- they're special purpose devices. Right? Having Linux running on them is cool; I just don't see it as a market for _core_. > As long as the software can be built for the ISA, I say leave it be. > There's a good reason to aim for 386 ISA, 486 ISA if needbe. 686 still > makes a nice optmization, as long as 386/486 is still the target ISA. > That's all my point is. 486 ISA is still quite commonplace, even if you > don't see the millions of systems where it's at. And my point is -- if you don't see them, then I don't think they're what FC is aimed at anyway. But the point about x86_64 and the future is a good one. i686 is basically nearing the end of its _mainstream_ :) life too, and no sense worrying about it now. -- Matthew Miller mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx <http://www.mattdm.org/> Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
