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. On 05/06/15 21:22, Toni Spets wrote: > 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. > > 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. > > 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. > > Thanks for considering. > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 9:44 PM, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org > <mailto:johnny at centos.org>> wrote: > > On 06/05/2015 05:46 AM, Vladimir Stackov wrote: > > Greetings, > > > > currently we are maintaining own CentOS 7 i686 rebuild and I > would like > > to kindly ask you to replace following macros from gcc.spec: > > > > %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7 > > %ifarch %{ix86} > > --with-arch=x86-64 \ > > %endif > > %ifarch x86_64 > > --with-arch_32=x86-64 \ > > %endif > > > > with that: > > > > %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7 > > %ifarch %{ix86} > > --with-arch=i686 \ > > %endif > > %ifarch x86_64 > > --with-arch_32=i686 \ > > %endif > > > > x86-64 causes gcc to use extended instruction set for produced > code and > > it's impossible to run CentOS 7 i686 on older systems without SSE2 > > instruction because of SIGILL. > > This affects Pentium 3, old VIA CPUs, old Xeons and some others. > > > > Is that possible? > > Thanks! > > > > <snip> > > I don't think we can do this as I also use the RPMs produced for the > multilib portion of CentOS-7 x86_64 and we want our RPMs to be like > those from upstream for that purpose. > > Thanks, > Johnny Hughes > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org <mailto:CentOS-devel at centos.org> > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > > > > > -- > Toni Spets > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20150605/a32e58a2/attachment-0008.html>