On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 08:09:30PM -0500, Mike Hicks wrote: > 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. 2.4.20-pre4 has a few minor compilation issues but other than that it works great (20 days uptime here). Cheers, florin -- "If it's not broken, let's fix it till it is." 41A9 2BDE 8E11 F1C5 87A6 03EE 34B3 E075 3B90 DFE4 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://shadowknight.real-time.com/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20020909/842b1d43/attachment.pgp