Why are there only i686 and i586 Version of glibc and kernel? -- i386 is still around

[David T Hollis]

On Tue, 2004-06-01 at 15:19 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 11:30:34AM -0400, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> > Frankly, I don't think people recognize the _real_ reason for trying to
> > keep i386/486 ISA compatibility.  It's not to support old systems, but to
> > support i386/486 ISA embedded microprocessor cores in all sorts of black
> > box solutions.  These solutions have full desktops/GUIs far more than you
> > may think.
> > All it takes is one major black box vendors to adopt Fedora and we're
> > talking over a 1% marketshare.
> 
> As I've said elsewhere, I think this niche would be better served by a
> Fedora Lite distribution than by making Fedora Core do it. (In fact, I'd
> include i586 with that.)
> 
> 

I agree with this.  The thought of trying to make Fedora Core fit every
possible scenario doesn't make sense and will hurt the overall product.
IMHO, it's goal is to be a usable desktop and low-end server platform.
It is not intended to be a 32mb, livecd, 386SX, micro-router distro.
There are other projects out there that attempt to fill those various
niches.  

-- 
David T Hollis <dhollis at davehollis.com>