Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!metro!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.mel.aone.net.au!grumpy.fl.net.au!news.webspan.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!204.191.213.61!ott.istar!istar.net!gateway.qnx.com!not-for-mail From: doug@qnx.com (Doug Santry) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: FreeBSD slower than Linux ? Date: 5 Feb 1997 15:36:20 -0500 Organization: QNX Software Systems Lines: 18 Message-ID: <5dar04$j50@qnx.com> References: <dkleinh.854654600@isotope.ps.uci.edu> <5cta6n$eio@helena.mt.net> <5d4s48$gru@qnx.com> <5d5vdb$emg@uriah.heep.sax.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: qnx.com Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:35204 In article <5d5vdb$emg@uriah.heep.sax.de>, J Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de> wrote: >doug@qnx.com (Doug Santry) wrote: > >> >Umm, no. You can't emulate hardware floating point calls, which is what >> >> Why not? If no FPU is present, then the instructions will cause a trap >> which can be caught. You know which instruction caused the trap, so just >> emulate it in software. > >But that's way slower. I agree. It would be a nightmare. A better idea would be on the first such trap to switch to different libs. I just objected to the "can't" which is different from "bad idea"!. He was responding to my previous post and claiming it couldn't be done. DJS