<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Is it really worth the effort? The last
Pentium III was released in 2002 and you couldn't buy them after
2003 so we're talking about machines that are 12 or more years
old. The fastest one you could ever buy is outperformed by a
factor of more than 2 times by each core on my dual core 2010
vintage Intel Atom D510.<br>
<br>
On 05/06/15 21:22, Toni Spets wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAM+GfYHBzjp12Ypp3TiLL+iu7y1LZv10wSy2-2c4qMsw_R7bow@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>This would be rather unfortunate as that would also leave
out all 32-bit only AMD processors (Athlon XP & co) as
well according to Wikipedia where it's said Athlon 64 was the
first one to add SSE2 and it can already run the 64-bit CentOS
anyway.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>I'm hoping there is more people that could +1 having
support for pre-SSE2 CPUs so it would be seriously considered
even though it might need massive rebuild of the multilib
packages. EPEL doesn't have multilib yet (right?) so they can
still adapt to whatever is going to be done. The packages
would run on upstream as well anyway.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Taking into account the actual computing power of CPUs, I
don't think it's unreasonable to run CentOS 7 on Pentium III
or Athlon XP.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Thanks for considering.<br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 9:44 PM, Johnny
Hughes <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:johnny@centos.org" target="_blank">johnny@centos.org</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5">On 06/05/2015 05:46 AM, Vladimir Stackov
wrote:<br>
> Greetings,<br>
><br>
> currently we are maintaining own CentOS 7 i686
rebuild and I would like<br>
> to kindly ask you to replace following macros from
gcc.spec:<br>
><br>
> %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7<br>
> %ifarch %{ix86}<br>
> --with-arch=x86-64 \<br>
> %endif<br>
> %ifarch x86_64<br>
> --with-arch_32=x86-64 \<br>
> %endif<br>
><br>
> with that:<br>
><br>
> %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7<br>
> %ifarch %{ix86}<br>
> --with-arch=i686 \<br>
> %endif<br>
> %ifarch x86_64<br>
> --with-arch_32=i686 \<br>
> %endif<br>
><br>
> x86-64 causes gcc to use extended instruction set
for produced code and<br>
> it's impossible to run CentOS 7 i686 on older
systems without SSE2<br>
> instruction because of SIGILL.<br>
> This affects Pentium 3, old VIA CPUs, old Xeons and
some others.<br>
><br>
> Is that possible?<br>
> Thanks!<br>
><br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<snip><br>
<br>
I don't think we can do this as I also use the RPMs produced
for the<br>
multilib portion of CentOS-7 x86_64 and we want our RPMs to
be like<br>
those from upstream for that purpose.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Johnny Hughes<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
CentOS-devel mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:CentOS-devel@centos.org">CentOS-devel@centos.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel"
target="_blank">http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
<div class="gmail_signature">Toni Spets</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CentOS-devel@centos.org">CentOS-devel@centos.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel">http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>