1 |
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:57 AM Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:19 AM Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 07:26:24 -0500 |
6 |
> > Ben Kohler <bkohler@g.o> wrote: |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > > Thoughts? |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > Is there a good reason we can't have a legacy profile for this? |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> > Or perhaps, a new (exp) arch entirely dedicated to legacy x86? |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Sounds like a lot of work for something that will be used by very few people. |
15 |
> |
16 |
|
17 |
I think an exp arch is also overkill. How many packages simply can't |
18 |
be built for i486? I think a profile+masking makes a lot more sense |
19 |
than an entire new level of QA that touches every ebuild in the tree |
20 |
because there might be a few packages that don't work on 25 year old |
21 |
hardware. |
22 |
|
23 |
-- |
24 |
Rich |