Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 12:40:15 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie AT tardis DOT ed DOT ac DOT uk>
To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: bzip2-mmx
Message-ID: <19990808124015.B9659@tardis.ed.ac.uk>
Mail-Followup-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
References: <Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 10 DOT 9908060214320 DOT 16525-100000 AT Cordes DOT Phys DOT Dal DOT Ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.3i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9908060214320.16525-100000@Cordes.Phys.Dal.Ca>; from Peter Cordes on Fri, Aug 06, 1999 at 02:46:26AM -0300
X-Cookie: "Cannot Undo Creation"
X-WWW-Homepage: http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/
Sender: Mark Alexander Brown <broonie AT sirena DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Aug 06, 1999 at 02:46:26AM -0300, Peter Cordes wrote:

> 2. MMX instructions are executed by the bzip2-mmx binary, even on non-mmx
> machines.  (I'm guessing that it is supposed to figure out which you have
> and run the appropriate code, so it is meant to work on non-mmx machines.
> If not, then this is not a bug.)

It's not supposed to do any detection of the machine.  The same thing
will happen with any of the other options which generate instructions
that don't run on all targets (eg, Pentium instructions).

-- 
Mark Brown  mailto:broonie AT tardis DOT ed DOT ac DOT uk   (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
            http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/
EUFS        http://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/filmsoc/