[CentOS-devel] Re: C5 i586 support.

Scott Silva ssilva at sgvwater.com
Fri Apr 4 17:16:53 UTC 2008


on 4-4-2008 4:26 AM Manuel Tuthill spake the following:
> Hello,
> 
> I've been trying to get in contact with some of the development team
> regarding i586 support in C5, I was kindly pointed in this direction.
> 
> Reading the archive I can see that it's not a planned feature excerpt below:
> 
> "The problem is that we do not want to support i586 on c5 and forward 
> because the anaconda changes required to make install possible are much 
> harder than on CentOS-4.
> 
> With the development of the c5 liveCD and that also depending on 
> anaconda, we do not think that i586 support is really worth the risk of 
> incompatibility that major changes to anaconda can cause.
> 
> Also ... the C5 openssl and glibc do NOW build on i586, however they are 
> not guaranteed to do so in the future. We have already had the centos-4 
> glibc NOT building on i586 and that causing problems in the past.
> 
> We will support i586 on CentOS-4 until 2012, but I don't see us 
> supporting it at this time on CentOS-5.  That could change."
> 
> I'd just like to throw my 2pence/2Cents in and explain why I think it should
> be supported, and then offer some help in developing it.
> 
> While most people seem to think that i586 is totally obsolete, I still use a
> few modern systems that use i586 instruction sets and may even consider a
> few more. For example I run a Via Epia ME6000 (600Mhz) as a silent HTPC with
> 1G ram.
> 
> With the over abundance of processing power in a modern computer and the
> proliferation of embedded type system running at home by hobbyists' and
> enthusiasts for asterisk and other single application. Given that Chips like
> the i586 Geode and Via Epia are popular it seems a little backward to me to
> stop supporting it.
> 
> Of course there are other distributions that will cover these. But I'm a
> Centos Fan and would prefer to continue running it on all my machines rather
> than only some.
> 
> So to this end I'd like to try and get some movement behind this. Knowing
> that first it looks like I'm going to have to get the powers that be to
> agree that it could be included if enough work could be done.
> 
> 
> Manuel
I doubt that hijacking a thread will endear you to the developers!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_hijacking


-- 
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20080404/f3d6d5e3/signature.bin


More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list