Re: [Fwd: Re: i686 Port]

On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 08:58:56PM +0100, Richard Thompson wrote:
> > I'm no expert, but I believe the thinking is that most of the processor
> > dependent code is in libc6, for which we do have the -i686 version, and
> > the kernel, which also comes in -686 flavors.
> >
> > Celejar

> Yes, I expect you are right about that, but there are other things such as
> services which, if they were i686 optimised I would expect to see a
> performance increase, I am also no expert, I was just jealous of arch's
> speed, and also suprisingly slackware's speed, which would suggest they've
> got something right

What kind of services don't run either in the kernel or in libc6?

As for getting "something right", if they truely are faster, faster isn't always "right". Faster could be less secure or less stable, or downright wrong coding.

The other issue is that 686 is starting, believe it or not, to get a little long in the tooth. More and more processors are able to run amd64. There is a whole amd64 port.

Doug.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org