On Mon, 2002-09-09 at 19:04, Shawn wrote: > If this is the case, and to help to boost performace better, wouldn't it > be easier/better to develop more towards today's processors/architecture > than to keep "legacy" systems in as well? Just a thought... I think many developers do try to target their code at relatively new systems, or at least whatever they can get their hands on. There are a lot of systems that have fallen by the wayside in the non-x86 Linux world, though. The SPARC (32-bit, not the 64-bit UltraSPARC) kernel code has become largely unmaintained. Some people hack on it occasionally, but you can't just pull down a 2.4.x kernel from ftp.kernel.org and get it to work. As long as there's someone out there who has time, knowledge, and a need for supporting something, it'll probably be supported. -- _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _ __ You have saved our lives, / \/ \(_)| ' // ._\ / - \(_)/ ./| ' /(__ we are eternally grateful! \_||_/|_||_|_\\___/ \_-_/|_|\__\|_|_\ __) [ Mike Hicks | http://umn.edu/~hick0088/ | mailto:hick0088 at tc.umn.edu ] -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://shadowknight.real-time.com/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20020909/15880ad4/attachment.pgp