Subject: Re: cygwin-inst-20000304 query
From: Michael Meissner <[email-masked]>
To: DJ Delorie <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 23:00:14 -0500

On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 10:08:13PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> > If they are just names that are independent of architecture, then
> > why is there any need to mention the architecture ?
> 
> Well, so you can tell the difference between those and, say,
> ppc-pc-cygwin.  Or, i86-pc-cygwin (if a 16-bit version were even
> possible).
> 
> > Furthermore, what is the point of changing the name of the
> > architecture if there is no difference ?
> 
> Marketing.  People don't like buying software for "older" computers.
> Plus, "uname" returns the actual cpu, and config.guess uses that, so
> if you built cygwin on a 486, it would default to i486-pc-cygwin
> because that's what you built it on.  We all have 686's so that's our
> default.

It does mean that by default a i686-pc-cygwin compiler will optimize for a i686
(aka, pentium-II and pentium-III), but it won't generate any instructions that
aren't common across the x86 architecture (ie, cmov and fcmov).

-- 
Michael Meissner, Cygnus Solutions, a Red Hat company.
PMB 198, 174 Littleton Road #3, Westford, Massachusetts 01886, USA
Work:	  [email-masked]		phone: +1 978-486-9304
Non-work: [email-masked]	fax:   +1 978-692-4482

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to [email-masked]