From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jun  5 15:00:46 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4415E37B401
	for <chat@freebsd.org>; Thu,  5 Jun 2003 15:00:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from papagena.rockefeller.edu (papagena.rockefeller.edu
	[129.85.41.71])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43A8D43F75
	for <chat@freebsd.org>; Thu,  5 Jun 2003 15:00:45 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from rsidd@papagena.rockefeller.edu)
Received: (from rsidd@localhost)
	by papagena.rockefeller.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h55M0e100571;
	Thu, 5 Jun 2003 18:00:40 -0400
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 18:00:40 -0400
From: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@online.fr>
To: Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>
Message-ID: <20030605180040.A562@online.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <3EDFB3BB.7090300@potentialtech.com>
X-Operating-System: Linux 2.4.9-12sm
cc: chat@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Peeve: why "i386"?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Non technical items related to the community
	<freebsd-chat.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat>,
	<mailto:freebsd-chat-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-chat>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-chat@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-chat-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat>,
	<mailto:freebsd-chat-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 22:00:46 -0000

Bill Moran wrote:
> Rahul Siddharthan wrote:
> > Why do all the BSDs continue to refer to the 32 bit Intel architecture
> > as i386 even when they typically won't even install on an i386 any
> > more?  Why not call it x86, or ia32, if not in the kernel config then
> > at least in the release notes and documentation, as everyone else has
> > been doing for years?
> 
> If it's that important to you, you're welcome to find all the places in
> the source and doc that it's used, correct them and submit patches.

Are you a committer, in particular a committer responsible for this?
In other words, can your response be taken in any way as "official"?

I wouldn't mind submitting patches to the doc project, if someone in
charge of this asks.  But obviously I can't submit patches for
something like the release notes and publicity material of FreeBSD 5.1
(which is what I'm really talking about).

Rahul