Message-Id: <199908091553.KAA03679@darwin.sfbr.org> Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 10:53:05 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeff Williams Subject: Re: CPU identification (Was: Re: uname -m ?) To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-MD5: I7b6SuQZfKJzYblZWbLKYA== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.3.4 SunOS 5.7 sun4u sparc Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com -: Also, if detecting x87 could be dangerous (i.e. risk crashing the -: program), I would vote against it. On a related note, I have seen lots of ways to *detect* an FPU (a 387 to be exact), but what about *testing* the FPU for functionality? I remember installing lots of 387's; it was easy enough to install the chip and then adjust a DIP switch, add/remove a jumper, then run some utility (e.g., Norton's SI) just to make sure it was detected, but afterwards you never really knew if the chip was really working as it should. If a program would run with or without a 387, would a faulty 387 ever have been detected after installation? This still bothers me. Does anyone know of a test suite for testing FPU functionality? TIA---jtw