[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAA787rm32vRRo-iMPs47t4zfBFaw5RoEiga8v6_AQRpfBfyAVw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 14:53:24 +0200
From: Øyvind A. Holm <sunny@...base.org>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Diego Viola <diego.viola@...il.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.com>,
Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] README: Mention when 386 support ended + update obsolete
386 paths
On 26 July 2016 at 14:12, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 09:45:43 +0200 Øyvind A. Holm <sunny@...base.org>
> wrote:
> > - Compiling the kernel with "Processor type" set higher than 386
> > will result in a kernel that does NOT work on a 386. The
> > - kernel will detect this on bootup, and give up.
> > + kernel will detect this on bootup, and give up. The last kernel
> > + with support for 386 was version 3.7.
>
> So we want the documentation to reflect current kernels, not those
> from years gone by. I can't think of a reason why this paragraph
> should continue to exist at all. Can you make a new version that
> removes it altogether?
That was also my first thought, yes. But then I thought, maybe there's
some value to that information in case someone wants to try a new kernel
on some ancient hardware. But it's probably an unlikely scenario. I'll
send a new patch now.
Øyvind
Powered by blists - more mailing lists