From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HWsL0-00029D-PJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 06:58:38 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HWsL0-00027V-2H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 06:58:38 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HWsKz-00026m-Rk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 05:58:37 -0500 Received: from 85-10-211-152.clients.your-server.de ([85.10.211.152] helo=nesselzelle.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HWsIP-0000cW-RJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 06:55:58 -0400 Received: from neuling ([85.10.211.152]:2865) by nesselzelle.de with [XMail 1.22 SSL Ext 0.0.3a ESMTP Server] via protocol=TLSv1/SSLv3, cipher=AES256-SHA(256) id for from ; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 12:57:14 +0200 Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 12:55:54 +0200 From: Thomas Orgis Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] 0.9.0 and svn don't build with -march=pentium2 etc.; was: Latest SVN fails to build on Fedora Core 6 (same with 0.9.0) Message-ID: <20070329125554.02174819@neuling> In-Reply-To: <200703281556.59315.rob@landley.net> References: <20070317143730.1befbf94@neuling> <20070323211124.4d7d7b79@neuling> <46051A67.6060300@gmail.com> <200703281556.59315.rob@landley.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Am Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:56:59 -0400 schrieb Rob Landley : > On Saturday 24 March 2007 8:32 am, Sunil Amitkumar Janki wrote: > > Anyhow, I expect 32-bit hardware to gradually die because of wear and > > tear in the next few years and the replacement will be 64-bit hardware so > > the problem will solve itself that way. > > Specifically, in 2008 32-bit x86 hardware both drops below 50% of the > installed base and stops being a commercial viable option for new sales in > the desktop or laptop space. Sure, 32bit is vanishing from new hardware sales. But I got my first machine that is able to decentnly run qemu just half a year ago: A used ThinkPad. I didn't buy a new computer system since my very first system in 1995 (which had to return to shop because they put a broken video card in... grmbl). So for me, 32 bits are the state-of-the art, apart from my two machines at work, which are Compaq XP1000's being 64 bit all-over, but as astonishing an EV67@667Mhz still can be at crunching floating point numbers, it's not a host for qemu VMs (esp. since it cannot use kqemu to accelerate x86 code ... hm, would qemu/kqemu work to run Tru64 accelerated in a vm on alpha?;-). And... I don't expect the 32bit hardware to die because of "wear and tear", especially when thinking of the i486DX4 that handles my DSL NAT routing needs, or about the Pentium 100 serving as music jukebox;-) Not to forget a i386DX40 that still just works fine when I decide to power it up. Well, I don't intend to run qemu on these old systems, and I only do it casually on my ThinkPad to test some software under a different OS. Sure, if becoming a qemu power user with several VMs doing work and compiling stuff, I'd think about becoming a dual/quad AMD64 user. On that edge, though, qemu should find a way to arrange with current gcc versions... gcc3.4 won't hold forever. Thomas.