Karmic i386 flavour changes

[Tim Gardner]

Colin Watson wrote:
> Oh, and have we done any benchmarking on the Ubuntu kernel with PAE
> turned off vs. on? http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/845637
> (parent: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/845514, thread:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/843866) has some fairly
> excoriating comments, noting that it slows down little things like
> fork() fairly significantly.
> 

Anyone running the Jaunty server kernel already suffers the PAE
performance hit, though I have no idea how significant that might be.

> It makes sense to me to offer a clear choice between non-PAE and PAE (I
> certainly understand why people might well not want to jump to amd64
> given the pain around compatibility libraries, although note that we're
> actually putting serious effort into multiarch now), and I have no
> issues with doing that; it'll help some users and satisfy OEMs. I just
> question whether we should be setting PAE as the default.
> 

I'm fine with offering users a choice. Given that we're not going to
have runtime PAE detection in Karmic, I consider this an installer
implementation issue.

rtg
-- 
Tim Gardner tim.gardner at canonical.com