Proposal to Drop Fedora 12 Features

[Jon Ciesla]

Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Thursday 16 July 2009 20:25:36 Jon Ciesla wrote:
>   
>>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:11 PM, John
>>>       
>> Poelstra<poelstra at redhat.com>
>>     
>>> wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Hi
>>>>         
>> FESCo,
>>     
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XZRpmPayloads
>>     
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F12X86Support
>>     
>>>       
>> Afaik those are blocking on
>>     
>>> 1) xz review request
>>> 2)
>>>       
>> rel-eng to coordinate a mass rebuild
>>
>> Has anyone taken concrete
>> steps for a i586 secondary arch yet?
>>     
>
> For the most part, its not (yet) necessary. We throttled back the
> definition of i686 from "i686 + cmov + sse2" or some such to just
> "i686 + cmov", so there are very few systems that would be served by
> an i586 secondary arch right now. i.e., Athlon XP, Pentium III, etc.,
> which *would* have been relegated to i586, are still going to be
> supported by i686, and we've talked about adding a cmov trap-and-emu
> function to keep supporting the few i686 procs w/o cmov, which really
> leaves only the original Pentium series that would benefit from an
> i586 secondary arch. At least, that's my vague recollection of it all
> right now... :)
>
>   
If this is the case, which is what I was hoping I remembered, then I 
agree with you that we don't *really* need it.  Bill, can you clarify 
the sse2 or no sse2 distinction, and possibly on the wiki page as well, 
since it was such a large thread? :)

It's a shame to end old hardware support, as it's always been one of my 
favourite things about Linux in general, but if I ever have any of that 
sort of hardware, I can make do. . .

-- 
in your fear, speak only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie