nando at ccrma.Stanford.EDU
Thu Apr 17 22:19:07 UTC 2008
On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 19:31 +0200, Jens M Andreasen wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 19:02 +0200, Mario Lang wrote:
> > No. If you optimize code, you will only have to special case
> > a few routines. The greater hunk of the code will stay the same on different
> > variants. So you do not want to precompile binary packages for
> > all sorts of special CPU types and feature, that would result in
> > a huge amount of data.
> Look here:
> Up to higher level directory
> SRPMS 09/18/2007 12:00:00 AM
> i586 04/10/2008 12:21:00 AM
> x86_64 04/10/2008 12:21:00 AM
> Here is at least two separate identical distributions of the Intel
> "architecture", so it can be done and has happened.
The difference you point out has _nothing_ to do with optimization and
is unavoidable for now.
That is the choice between a 32 bit operating system and a 64 bit
operating system (on both Intel and AMD architectures). Eventually 32
bit systems will die of old age as _all_ programs run fine on 64 bits
and that directory will be erased.
Distributions and packagers will surely make a big party when that
> Perhaps x86_64 will be fine-grained enough to define a pleasant platform
> seen from an audio developers perspective? Which means death to sse,
> long live sse3! :-D
> IIRC the current celeron 540M should fit the definition for a low cost
> > I am still convinced that runtime detection is a much more sensible solution.
More information about the Linux-audio-dev