On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 01:25:45PM +0000, Thomas Lockhart wrote: > > Did we decide that "most NetBSD/i386 users have fpus" in which case Marko's > > patch should be applied? > > I'm unclear on what y'all mean by "i386 + fpu", especially since NetBSD > seems to insist on calling every Intel processor a "i386". History ;-) > In this case, > are you suggesting that this patch covers all NetBSD installations on > every Intel processor from i386 + fpu forward to i486, i586, etc etc? Yes! It's simply, if the peecee type thing has a fpu (as in the sysctl machdep.fpu_present returns 1), then libm387.so is used, and you get differences in the (from memory 44th insignificant figure?) otherwise it just uses libm.so and you get what is currently correct in resultmap. Cheers, Patrick ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: [HACKERS] Call for platforms Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] Call for platforms Marko Kreen
- Re: [HACKERS] Call for platforms Patrick Welche
- Re: [HACKERS] Call for platforms Giles Lean
- Re: [HACKERS] Call for platforms Patrick Welche
- Re: [HACKERS] Call for platfor... Marko Kreen
- Re: [HACKERS] Call for platfor... Patrick Welche
- Re: [HACKERS] Call for platfor... Giles Lean
- Re: [HACKERS] Call for platfor... Patrick Welche
- [HACKERS] Re: Call for platfor... Thomas Lockhart
- [HACKERS] Re: Call for platfor... Patrick Welche
- [HACKERS] Re: Call for platforms Thomas Lockhart
- [HACKERS] Re: Call for platforms The Hermit Hacker
- [HACKERS] Re: Call for platforms Thomas Lockhart
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for platforms Larry Rosenman
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for platforms The Hermit Hacker
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for platforms Thomas Lockhart
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for platforms The Hermit Hacker
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for platfor... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for pla... The Hermit Hacker
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: Call for pla... Tom Lane