On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 12:22:09PM -0800, ben wrote: > i've actually found "pentium" to still be the safest bet, even on amd > machines, and the optimization for any particular cpu is rarely reliable, > anyway. for quite a while, "pentium" sucked and 386 was the only reliable > option. selecting the newest cpu variant in kernel compilation is a lot like > using debian unstable--there will be bugginess to contend with--except that > in the case of a buggy kernel, you really need a good reason to put your > system at risk for the kind of trouble you can get. i'd give the "pentium 4" > option at least another six months before risking the loss of any critical > data to it.
Have you ever heard of anyone having serious problems using processor-specific optimisations? -rob
pgpk2EUd8XswH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
