Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

[Reindl Harald]

Am 08.11.2015 um 00:56 schrieb Kevin Kofler:
> Reindl Harald wrote:
>> if there would be no difference kernel upstream won't invest that much
>> time for runtime-cpu-detection (look at the bootlog on different hardware)
>
> Exactly BECAUSE performance-critical software normally does runtime
> detection (except where upstream is really really lazy), hardcoding a
> requirement for newer instruction sets does not buy us anything.

define performance critical

our cms systems got 5 times faster within 6 months by micro-optimizig 
each alone would not had any effect

> The absence of a portable fallback also makes the software unusable on our
> secondary architectures, and in some cases (such as Darktable), even on the
> PRIMARY architecture ARM. (Now, whether ARM should be a primary architecture
> to begin with is a different matter, but it currently is.)
>
> So I really don't understand those upstreams that provide ONLY platform-
> specific vector code with no portable version

i understand them well - not endless time and write effecient software 
without test on dozens of environments older than 10 years - as C 
programmer if i would write new code these days i would even go so far 
and rely on AVX

yes, that can't be done for a distribution, but i know that all machines 
sorrounding me are SandyBridge bases, even the network routers for small 
offices and so why would i care about anything else?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20151108/94944727/attachment-0001.sig>