X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org From: "Dave Korn" To: Subject: RE: i686-pc-cygwin on an i586 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:34:41 -0000 Message-ID: <008401c6235f$9280aed0$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <20060127153615.20800.qmail@web37214.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On 27 January 2006 15:36, James McLaughlin wrote: > Hi, > > Cygwin contains several files/folders with names including the string > "i686-pc-cygwin". I'm using it on an i586, and I've been wondering if I'm > supposed to be - should I have deduced from this name that there would be > problems trying to use Cygwin on a 586? (I do have a few problems when > using Cygwin, such as gcc-g++ being very slow to compile, but for all I > know that could just be because I've got a very slow machine) Nope, don't worry about it, that's a bit of a red-herring. By default, the code gcc generates is good for everything from '486 up. The instruction scheduling and choice of which instructions to use may be tuned to be optimal for a 686 and so may be less-than-optimal on a '586, but there should not be any actual backward-compatibility issues. cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today.... -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/