Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 8 Nov 2000 14:47:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 8 Nov 2000 14:47:47 -0500 Received: from mauve.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.38]:8652 "EHLO mauve.csi.cam.ac.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 8 Nov 2000 14:47:35 -0500 From: "James A. Sutherland" To: George Anzinger Subject: Re: Installing kernel 2.4 Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 19:43:46 +0000 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.28] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Horst von Brand , "Jeff V. Merkey" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200011081205.eA8C5ui27838@pincoya.inf.utfsm.cl> <00110816543500.01639@dax.joh.cam.ac.uk> <3A098F11.1B89EB7B@mvista.com> In-Reply-To: <3A098F11.1B89EB7B@mvista.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <00110819463200.01915@dax.joh.cam.ac.uk> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, George Anzinger wrote: > But, here the customer did run the configure code (he said he did not > change anything). Isn't this where the machine should be diagnosed and > the right options chosen? Need a way to say it is a cross build, but > that shouldn't be too hard. Why default to incompatibility?! If the user explicitly says "I really do want a kernel which only works on this specific machine as it is now, and I want it to break otherwise", fine. Don't make it a default! BTW: Has anyone benchmarked the different optimizations - i.e. how much difference does optimizing for a Pentium make when running on a PII? More to the point, how about optimizing non-exclusively for a Pentium, so the code still runs on earlier CPUs? James. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/