Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:39:33 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/lang/gcc34 Makefile distinfo Message-ID: <20040220153933.GA29018@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.58.0402200945010.84681@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> References: <200402192212.i1JMCUxx092480@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040219222006.GA19860@xor.obsecurity.org> <Pine.BSF.4.58.0402192335590.47964@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <20040220012254.GB4306@dragon.nuxi.com> <Pine.BSF.4.58.0402200945010.84681@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Feb 20, 2004 at 09:46:42AM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Thu, 19 Feb 2004, David O'Brien wrote: > >> (In any case, shouldn't amd64-freebsd be renamed back to x86_64-freebsd, > >> given Intel's announcement two days ago?) > > NO! > > You are obviously biased (given your day job). I am, but I've never demanded that FreeBSD's use of "i386" and "ia32" be changed. AMD has affected the modern 32-bit x86 architecture as much as Intel has. AMD paid all the millions and millions for the ISV & IHV support. W/o AMD going to market with this design there would be no "ia32e" from Intel. Intel had no choice and was totally forced by the market to do their "ia32e". We owe honoring AMD by calling the platform "amd64". -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040220153933.GA29018>