Re: debian architecture history question
On Vi, 11 iun 10, 11:09:18, Aaron Toponce wrote: Other than the kernel, which is compiled for 686 instruction sets, and maybe a few core packages that would benefit from targeting the 686 architecture, Debian compiles the rest of the packages against 386. AFAIR support for 386 was dropped a while ago and all packages are now compiled for 486. There was even some announcement, but can't find it now... Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: debian architecture history question
Ron Johnson put forth on 6/15/2010 10:21 AM: On 06/15/2010 04:34 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: [snip] Disclaimer: my comments below intentionally exclude x86-64 capable CPUs There are different kernels for different models of the Intel x86 processor family and compatibles, but make no mistake, they all use the same instruction set introduced in the 80386. There is no i686 instruction set, nor an i586 or i486 instruction set. This is just *wrong*. No, it's not just wrong. If you read the Intel literature, there is a single IA32 instruction set. Some processor models have additional model specific instructions because they introduce new registers, but the instruction set, or IA32 ISA, is the same across the board. I clearly explained later in my post that some models have model specific extensions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_instruction_listings#Added_with_80486 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_instruction_listings#Added_with_Pentium_Pro You may think that's not a lot, but it is to a compiler writer, and it demonstrates that Stan's wrong. Is this about answering the OP's question or proving me wrong? You said that twice now, and that duck doesn't hunt. I've stated nothing factually incorrect. That said, I'm not the maintainer of the i486, i586, and i686 kernels, so I can't say with certainty exactly what is included in each kernel or what gcc flags were used when built. However, specifically in the case of the i486 kernel, I find it hard to believe a kernel would be rebuilt due to 6 new instructions, 3 of which simply flush the L1 cache in one fashion or another. I could be wrong, though it seems like wasted effort given the small gain. In the case of the Pentium Pro, Intel simply added a conditional for each move instruction. Again, I don't know if using these instructions would yield much if any performance gain for kernel code. Again, I believe the differences in these kernels have more to do with subroutines that address specific features of each platform than with what instructions were exposed to gcc at compile time. The largest difference is the BIOS for each of these CPU generations, and different BIOSes are going to require different kernel code. In the case of the Pentium Pro (and later) there is code to manage the L2 cache, although you don't see anything related to L2 cache instructions on the Wikipedia pages. I'd say the data there is incomplete. I'll have to research it. Also, AFAIK, the i686 kernels run on the Cyrix 6x86, which, IIRC, doesn't support the conditional move instructions of the Intel PPro... As a matter of fact, the latter of these aren't even models of Intel CPUs. You're right, just as I'm not The Johnsons. That's a *family* designation. Now that's just plain wrong. There is no i586 or i686 family. People other than Intel came up with these descriptions. Intel specifically made a point that there is no 586 and no 686. They did this because copyright became an issue when they tried to silence their competition in court. The judges said you can't copyright a number. Thus Intel invented Pentium and copyrighted it so competitors making compatible chips couldn't piggy back. What kernel programmers call i586 and i686 are actually classes or sets of features of Intel and compatible competitor CPUs from Cyrix, IBM, TI, and AMD. The original Intel 60/66 MHz Pentium model number is actually 80501. All Pentiums up to the MMX models were numbered 80502. The i686 kernel label describes the Pentium Pro, whose model number is 80521, and all other later 32 bit x86 CPUs to follow it. Manufacturing codes? So what? These aren't manufacturing codes, these are model numbers. Everyone calls a 386 a 386 because the chip model number is 80386. Same for all Intel chips before it, and the 80486 or 486 after it. The Pentium is actually Intel model 80501. Again, Intel specifically did this to get away from model numbers as product names. My whole point here was that Intel never described their Pentium or Pentium Pro with any kind of family model number designation as had previously been done. They intentionally changed course. Everyone else, however, applied their own labels, and continued naming Intel's chips in succession, even though Intel didn't. [big snip of partly correct, partly nonsense] Thanks for the civil critique Ron. Now, go talk to the devs and find out exactly what the differences are between the kernels in question, and then you can elaborate on my degree of nonsense. :) -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c18a619.1040...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: debian architecture history question
Aaron Toponce put forth on 6/14/2010 10:02 AM: On 6/12/2010 8:11 PM, Anand Sivaram wrote: On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 22:39, Aaron Toponce aaron.topo...@gmail.com mailto:aaron.topo...@gmail.com wrote: Other than the kernel, which is compiled for 686 instruction sets, and maybe a few core packages that would benefit from targeting the 686 architecture, Debian compiles the rest of the packages against 386. There is no 386 kernel available. Kernel starts from 486 only. I never mentioned there was a 386 kernel. Disclaimer: my comments below intentionally exclude x86-64 capable CPUs There are different kernels for different models of the Intel x86 processor family and compatibles, but make no mistake, they all use the same instruction set introduced in the 80386. There is no i686 instruction set, nor an i586 or i486 instruction set. As a matter of fact, the latter of these aren't even models of Intel CPUs. What kernel programmers call i586 and i686 are actually classes or sets of features of Intel and compatible competitor CPUs from Cyrix, IBM, TI, and AMD. The original Intel 60/66 MHz Pentium model number is actually 80501. All Pentiums up to the MMX models were numbered 80502. The i686 kernel label describes the Pentium Pro, whose model number is 80521, and all other later 32 bit x86 CPUs to follow it. The differences in the kernels designed for (notice I did not say _compiled_ for) each of these CPU generations/models has nothing to do with different instruction sets (remember they all use the same ISA), but with specific features found in these various CPUs and/or features of the platform classes. For example, to use PCI devices and to map them into memory properly requires support in the kernel, as does mapping PCI IRQs. 80386/80486 systems don't have PCI buses but only ISA (and very rarely VESA) buses and thus don't require the kernel code to support PCI. Likewise, the 80[34]86 and the 80501 don't offer 36 bits of addressing nor PAE. The 80521 Pentium Pro and later CPUs do. PAE support requires kernel code to enable and use up to 64GB of physical memory. The main difference between the 80521 Pentium Pro and earlier CPUs, other than the software transparent decoupled CISC/RISC core, is in cache and memory management. The 80521 introduced the now ubiquitous dedicated L2 cache bus, called a backside bus and an L2 cache fully controlled by the CPU core MMU. All previous CPUs dating back to the 80486 had their L2 caches sitting on the main system bus which created a bottleneck. Moving the L2 cache to a dedicated bus required a more sophisticated on chip MMU. This also requires kernel support, and AFAIK is the main difference between i686 kernels and the i486 i586 kernels. The other significant difference is the 36 bit physical address bus of the PPro and Physical Address Extensions, or PAE. When using one of the i686-bigmem kernels, PAE is enabled and the kernel can directly access up to 64GB of installed RAM. Again, the differences in the various 32bit kernels have nothing to do with the instruction sets being different. They are identical. The differences in the kernels are due to underlying features of the processor models and features of their respective platforms, _not the instruction sets_. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c17491f.1040...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: debian architecture history question
On 20100615_043423, Stan Hoeppner wrote: Aaron Toponce put forth on 6/14/2010 10:02 AM: On 6/12/2010 8:11 PM, Anand Sivaram wrote: On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 22:39, Aaron Toponce aaron.topo...@gmail.com mailto:aaron.topo...@gmail.com wrote: Other than the kernel, which is compiled for 686 instruction sets, and maybe a few core packages that would benefit from targeting the 686 architecture, Debian compiles the rest of the packages against 386. There is no 386 kernel available. Kernel starts from 486 only. I never mentioned there was a 386 kernel. Disclaimer: my comments below intentionally exclude x86-64 capable CPUs There are different kernels for different models of the Intel x86 processor family and compatibles, but make no mistake, they all use the same instruction set introduced in the 80386. There is no i686 instruction set, nor an i586 or i486 instruction set. As a matter of fact, the latter of these aren't even models of Intel CPUs. What kernel programmers call i586 and i686 are actually classes or sets of features of Intel and compatible competitor CPUs from Cyrix, IBM, TI, and AMD. The original Intel 60/66 MHz Pentium model number is actually 80501. All Pentiums up to the MMX models were numbered 80502. The i686 kernel label describes the Pentium Pro, whose model number is 80521, and all other later 32 bit x86 CPUs to follow it. The differences in the kernels designed for (notice I did not say _compiled_ for) each of these CPU generations/models has nothing to do with different instruction sets (remember they all use the same ISA), but with specific features found in these various CPUs and/or features of the platform classes. For example, to use PCI devices and to map them into memory properly requires support in the kernel, as does mapping PCI IRQs. 80386/80486 systems don't have PCI buses but only ISA (and very rarely VESA) buses and thus don't require the kernel code to support PCI. Likewise, the 80[34]86 and the 80501 don't offer 36 bits of addressing nor PAE. The 80521 Pentium Pro and later CPUs do. PAE support requires kernel code to enable and use up to 64GB of physical memory. The main difference between the 80521 Pentium Pro and earlier CPUs, other than the software transparent decoupled CISC/RISC core, is in cache and memory management. The 80521 introduced the now ubiquitous dedicated L2 cache bus, called a backside bus and an L2 cache fully controlled by the CPU core MMU. All previous CPUs dating back to the 80486 had their L2 caches sitting on the main system bus which created a bottleneck. Moving the L2 cache to a dedicated bus required a more sophisticated on chip MMU. This also requires kernel support, and AFAIK is the main difference between i686 kernels and the i486 i586 kernels. The other significant difference is the 36 bit physical address bus of the PPro and Physical Address Extensions, or PAE. When using one of the i686-bigmem kernels, PAE is enabled and the kernel can directly access up to 64GB of installed RAM. Again, the differences in the various 32bit kernels have nothing to do with the instruction sets being different. They are identical. The differences in the kernels are due to underlying features of the processor models and features of their respective platforms, _not the instruction sets_. -- Stan Help me understand this issue better. There are kernel versions in Debian that are labeled i686 and i386. If they use the 'same instruction set', then they must differ in some other way than the 'instruction set'. Correct? In what way do they differ? I suppose it is in the way those instructions are arranged, or what? I don't have computers of the several different Intel chip versions, so I can't experiment, but I suppose that an i686 kernel would not work well on a chip that has the older arrangement of L2 cache. I would also suppose that an i386 kernel would work on a chip that does have the newer L2 cache, but would not actually use the new features and would therefore be slower in execution. Yes/no ? My original issue was trying to establish a rational basis for selecting software packages to download. Of course, originally I was mistaken as to the extent of this problem. I had thought that almost all packages were offered in different i[36]86 versions. I soon learned that it was only kernel packages that are at issue. But for these packages, if the instruction set for the two classes of chip are the same, what is it that is different from the point of view of the kernel software requirements? I think I have repeated the same question several times with different wording. If none of these wordings fit the underlying reality, please suggest a better question. -- Paul E Condon pecon...@mesanetworks.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: debian architecture history question
On 06/15/2010 04:34 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: [snip] Disclaimer: my comments below intentionally exclude x86-64 capable CPUs There are different kernels for different models of the Intel x86 processor family and compatibles, but make no mistake, they all use the same instruction set introduced in the 80386. There is no i686 instruction set, nor an i586 or i486 instruction set. This is just *wrong*. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_instruction_listings#Added_with_80486 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_instruction_listings#Added_with_Pentium_Pro You may think that's not a lot, but it is to a compiler writer, and it demonstrates that Stan's wrong. As a matter of fact, the latter of these aren't even models of Intel CPUs. You're right, just as I'm not The Johnsons. That's a *family* designation. What kernel programmers call i586 and i686 are actually classes or sets of features of Intel and compatible competitor CPUs from Cyrix, IBM, TI, and AMD. The original Intel 60/66 MHz Pentium model number is actually 80501. All Pentiums up to the MMX models were numbered 80502. The i686 kernel label describes the Pentium Pro, whose model number is 80521, and all other later 32 bit x86 CPUs to follow it. Manufacturing codes? So what? [big snip of partly correct, partly nonsense] -- There is usually only a limited amount of damage that can be done by dull or stupid people. For creating a truly monumental disaster, you need people with high IQs. Thomas Sowell -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c179a7c.5060...@cox.net
Re: debian architecture history question
On Tuesday 15 June 2010 04:34:23 Stan Hoeppner wrote: Again, the differences in the various 32bit kernels have nothing to do with the instruction sets being different. They are identical. Incorrect. The i486 lines of chip (486 architecture in gcc) supports CMPXCHG and 5 other instructions which result in illegal instruction exceptions on a 80386. CMPXCHG is used for fast locking in modern kernel + glibc/eglibc. That's why there is no -386 kernel image available. The Pentium lines (586 architecture in gcc) support another 6 additional instructions, and one of those was actually included in i486 processors that were designed after the Pentium line: CPUID. Again, on 80386 and most i486 processors, these will cause an illegal instruction exception. System mangement mode was introduced here as well. The Pentium Pro line (686 architecture in gcc) gave us conditional move instructions. Attempted execution of these instructions on 386, 486, or 586 processors will, again, cause an illegal instruction exception. Details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_instruction_listings In addition to the upgrades to the instruction set, the micro-architecture changed a number of times between the original 80386 and the most recent IA-32 only chips from Intel. Of course, other manufacturers of IA-32 chips had different micro-architectures. GCC has two separate options that reflect these parallel changes: -march=cpu-type will generate code that uses instructions supported by $cpu- type, but not necessarily by the original 80386. -mtune=cpu-type will generate code that runs best on the micro- architecture of $cpu-type, but still uses only instuctions that are shared across the whole IA-32 family. Those two options can of course be combined to produce (e.g.) a kernel that runs on anything Pentium or better, but runs best on the Nocona micro- architecture. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: debian architecture history question
On Tuesday 15 June 2010 10:21:06 Paul E Condon wrote: But for these packages, if the instruction set for the two classes of chip are the same, what is it that is different from the point of view of the kernel software requirements? The micro-architecture. Basically, how the instruction set is implemented in transistor layouts inside the IC. Instruction ordering is part of it. (Also, the instruction set used by -686 packages is actually larger than the instruction set used by -484 packages.) -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: debian architecture history question
On 6/12/2010 8:11 PM, Anand Sivaram wrote: On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 22:39, Aaron Toponce aaron.topo...@gmail.com mailto:aaron.topo...@gmail.com wrote: Other than the kernel, which is compiled for 686 instruction sets, and maybe a few core packages that would benefit from targeting the 686 architecture, Debian compiles the rest of the packages against 386. There is no 386 kernel available. Kernel starts from 486 only. I never mentioned there was a 386 kernel. -- . O . O . O . . O O . . . O . . . O . O O O . O . O O . . O O O O . O . . O O O O . O O O signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: debian architecture history question
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 22:39, Aaron Toponce aaron.topo...@gmail.comwrote: On 6/11/2010 11:03 AM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: I'm not exactly sure what the policy is for packages in the i386 archives in general, but I believe they are supposed to have -586 or -686 in their package name is they require those instruction sets. Some of the A/V codec libraries had stuff like that for a while, IIRC. I believe currently they auto-probe for the processor features and use what is available at runtime. Other than the kernel, which is compiled for 686 instruction sets, and maybe a few core packages that would benefit from targeting the 686 architecture, Debian compiles the rest of the packages against 386. -- . O . O . O . . O O . . . O . . . O . O O O . O . O O . . O O O O . O . . O O O O . O O O There is no 386 kernel available. Kernel starts from 486 only.
Re: debian architecture history question
On 06/12/2010 09:11 PM, Anand Sivaram wrote: On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 22:39, Aaron Toponce aaron.topo...@gmail.com mailto:aaron.topo...@gmail.com wrote: On 6/11/2010 11:03 AM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: I'm not exactly sure what the policy is for packages in the i386 archives in general, but I believe they are supposed to have -586 or -686 in their package name is they require those instruction sets. Some of the A/V codec libraries had stuff like that for a while, IIRC. I believe currently they auto-probe for the processor features and use what is available at runtime. Other than the kernel, which is compiled for 686 instruction sets, and maybe a few core packages that would benefit from targeting the 686 architecture, Debian compiles the rest of the packages against 386. There is no 386 kernel available. Kernel starts from 486 only. Because of, I think, libc6. Some functions since 5ish years ago need opcodes that don't in the 80386. -- There is usually only a limited amount of damage that can be done by dull or stupid people. For creating a truly monumental disaster, you need people with high IQs. Thomas Sowell -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c14414a.2040...@cox.net
debian architecture history question
I'm in the process of working a bug on my desktop PC. The CPU is a Semperon (32bit AMD). I recall that I once used i686. But now I think I am using i386. When I make a bug report, reportbug includes the line: Architecture: i386 (i686) I guess that i686 has somehow been merged into i386, but I cannot confirm this guess by googling. I only get old discussion, nothing announcing a resolution to the discussion. I'm sure there is an announcement somewhere that explains how the issue was resolved and why everyone should be happy. I'd like to read it and be happy. But I can't find it. Please help. -- Paul E Condon pecon...@mesanetworks.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100611164216.ga13...@big.lan.gnu
Re: debian architecture history question
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 06/11/2010 12:42 PM, Paul E Condon wrote: I'm in the process of working a bug on my desktop PC. The CPU is a Semperon (32bit AMD). I recall that I once used i686. But now I think I am using i386. When I make a bug report, reportbug includes the line: Architecture: i386 (i686) I guess that i686 has somehow been merged into i386, but I cannot confirm this guess by googling. I only get old discussion, nothing announcing a resolution to the discussion. I'm sure there is an announcement somewhere that explains how the issue was resolved and why everyone should be happy. I'd like to read it and be happy. But I can't find it. Please help. My guess would be i386 arch with the i686 (default) kernel. However, it is just a guess and you are looking for solid evidence. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJMEmlLAAoJEKj/C3qNthmTX80P/0GZ/NgdEB/mytmWfHn250ou BgnyFeXsxl0nAKdnoQQGxd/hQWj0Er0BMLxDLhrkRGmLH9P935WAZo1XH4IIrZA/ yLg9km6hIsUAT6AfNR50TOxafZqRdHQ587+UoV8sJRleVvMxhuUV9UJuon+hsSvJ 8BBa2jHT+ewYmOfczXY5po+JcLFLu9v13Jq4N0Tq5gjbrVkKCfzDsJlkBkntdM5G dpx8s4BfrKiWlARj4+L2pbvszHUHLhDyxDZeGF3A9IE0qXqAb/7IFz09MLMbITok Ej19TGfaWqZeVkMc0zVPBE0kG4eE7G9lWUCvDP6uv5s1kgsN8tVkF5ovpEvTDS5V VtCDda+1w8Nb6bhD4PAbhOhDhA4A3ux1KXRjCHEuX7KzE0fmA0kOriXuzl8K5G8I 0rs1/akouS5UN6hpXyek+lucy8gsGlg4waY7yPXQv/jiHB0kO42mTWyKFxESr+qB iVSwQi7Ydpqr/VebOkLE7jRNWzlDpCU34+RAreLudUknB1IiRgj6sHpm1eRc6Hjb /Gh4I9cnsw+4QmukTDtu5Un+zYnLgA37nejnySW9cmXm428KAn2HRjyEG2LGG12K 4Qnrx+mdcEyaepml+fM82kzLr072PJfaQEghLk8WYEuT90FYiuXPFc/Z+PwXpHCc 0xVRmnG72LjgMx3A120q =E8Tl -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c12694c.6020...@gmail.com
Re: debian architecture history question
On 2010-06-11 18:42 +0200, Paul E Condon wrote: I'm in the process of working a bug on my desktop PC. The CPU is a Semperon (32bit AMD). I recall that I once used i686. But now I think I am using i386. No, you always used the Debian architecture i386. The kernel may be built for a 686-compatible processor, though. When I make a bug report, reportbug includes the line: Architecture: i386 (i686) I guess that i686 has somehow been merged into i386, but I cannot confirm this guess by googling. This is wrong. The first string is the output from dpkg --print-architecture, the one in parentheses comes from uname -m. Sven -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87hbl9v774@turtle.gmx.de
Re: debian architecture history question
On Friday 11 June 2010 11:42:16 Paul E Condon wrote: I'm in the process of working a bug on my desktop PC. The CPU is a Semperon (32bit AMD). I recall that I once used i686. But now I think I am using i386. When I make a bug report, reportbug includes the line: Architecture: i386 (i686) I guess that i686 has somehow been merged into i386, They were never entirely separate architectures. The i486, i586, and i686 instruction sets were strict supersets of the i386 instruction set. Mostly likely this line is reporting your dpkg architecture and your kernel architecture. The dpkg architecture is still called i386, but I believe the libc requires the i486 instruction set, and there is no pre-compiled kernel image that does not require at least the i486 instruction set. I think all the 32-bit processors on the market right now are i686 or better, but there might be some i586 embedded processors on the market still. Debian provides a pre-compiled kernel images that depends on the i686 architecture, and can therefore take advantage of the extra (faster) instructions in i686 processors. I'm not exactly sure what the policy is for packages in the i386 archives in general, but I believe they are supposed to have -586 or -686 in their package name is they require those instruction sets. Some of the A/V codec libraries had stuff like that for a while, IIRC. I believe currently they auto-probe for the processor features and use what is available at runtime. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: debian architecture history question
On 6/11/2010 11:03 AM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: I'm not exactly sure what the policy is for packages in the i386 archives in general, but I believe they are supposed to have -586 or -686 in their package name is they require those instruction sets. Some of the A/V codec libraries had stuff like that for a while, IIRC. I believe currently they auto-probe for the processor features and use what is available at runtime. Other than the kernel, which is compiled for 686 instruction sets, and maybe a few core packages that would benefit from targeting the 686 architecture, Debian compiles the rest of the packages against 386. -- . O . O . O . . O O . . . O . . . O . O O O . O . O O . . O O O O . O . . O O O O . O O O signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
