On Thu, 06 Jan 2000, Dominik Kubla wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2000 at 06:43:17PM -0800, David Schwartz wrote:
> >
> > You are making his point, not refuting it. All these things have moved to
> > 32-bits where they would previously have been done with 8-bit or 16-bit
> > processors. They will likewise move to 64-bits.
> >
> Hmm, haven't looked at it from this angle. But the switch to 32bits was
> done by necessity and 8/16bit EC are not dead.
This is absolutely true. The question is not whether your old 486 will still
be in service in 2037 but whether *any* 32 bit cpus will still be in service.
And it's a dead certainty that they will. What do we think will be running on
our wristwatches and phones? Even 40 years from now, 64 bit cpus will just be
a waste of power and space for many embedded applications.
It seems to me this is a *tiny* thing to fix, given that applications and
libraries have 37 years to migrate to a slightly new syscall, as long as the
bad old way of doing things remains available. OK, I'll stop now - I suppose my
point would have been made better if I'd also attached a patch :-)
-- Daniel- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 07 2000 - 21:00:07 EST