From: Hank@nospam.invalid   
      
   Dave Yeo wrote on 7/27/2025 6:38 PM:   
   > Hank Rogers wrote:   
   >> Dave Yeo wrote on 7/27/2025 2:06 PM:   
   >>> Hank Rogers wrote:   
   >>>> I used old versions for 20 years on an old windows XP computer that   
   >>>> couldn't run newer seamonkey versions because it had an AMD processor,   
   >>>> which was missing certain newer processor instructions.   
   >>>   
   >>> That's strange. Did you ever file a bug?   
   >>> Dave   
   >>   
   >> No, it wasn't a bug. That old AMD T-bird processor was missing an   
   >> instruction that was needed by seamonkey. Forgot what it was called.   
   >> Later processors, or even intel processors of those days didn't have the   
   >> problem.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Was it SSE or SSE2? When I had a T-bird processor, missing those caused   
   > some problems, though not with SM. Up until, IIRC, 52ESR or SM2.49, it   
   > was a configuration choice for the build to use   
   > intl/uconv/nsUTF8ToUnicodeSSE2.cpp instead of   
   > intl/uconv/nsUTF8ToUnicode.cpp, might have been other similar code   
   > elsewhere. moz.build has,   
   > if CONFIG['INTEL_ARCHITECTURE']:   
   >      SOURCES += ['nsUTF8ToUnicodeSSE2.cpp']   
   >      SOURCES['nsUTF8ToUnicodeSSE2.cpp'].flags += CONFIG['SSE2_FLAGS']   
   >   
   > So a decision to target INTEL_ARCHITECTURE instead of simply i686 or   
   > even i486 it seems. It has been a long time and I never did use XP. I   
   > also can't remember when Mozilla decided a Pentium M was the minimum   
   > supported CPU.   
   > Dave   
      
   My memory has faded but sse2 has a familiar look. Haven't used that old   
   XP machine in a long time. I do remember finding later versions of pale   
   moon and kmeleon that had been compiled to run without sse2.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)