From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 26 18:05:00 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E91E216A417 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 18:05:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.org) Received: from dragon.nuxi.org (trang.nuxi.org [74.95.12.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBF5C13C461 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 18:05:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.org) Received: from dragon.nuxi.org (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.nuxi.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id lAQI50Sj079993; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 10:05:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.org) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id lAQI50AD079992; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 10:05:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 10:05:00 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" To: Kip Macy , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20071126180500.GB79600@dragon.NUXI.org> Mail-Followup-To: obrien@freebsd.org, Kip Macy , freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <474983F1.3030700@pbxpress.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 7.0-CURRENT User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Cc: Subject: Re: Is it possible to debug an AMD kernel on Intel X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: obrien@freebsd.org List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 18:05:01 -0000 On Sun, Nov 25, 2007 at 10:32:13PM -0800, Kip Macy wrote: > Also can we do what the rest of the world does and refer to it as > x86_64 or 64-bit intel? Continuing to refer to it as amd (I know they > came up with instruction set extensions but its now a fundamental part > of the x86 ISA) only serves to confuse new users. NO. AMD pioneered this platform. Without them we'd all be unhappily headed towards IA64's. It is Intel that has constantly chosen to confuse its customers. This is not a problem for The FreeBSD Project to fix. Also why wouldn't calling it "64-bit Intel" confuse the Opteron users? Or creation confusion that you run "64-bit Intel" on Itanium machines? Why aren't folks confused that you should use FreeBSD/i386 on a Core2 Duo (or an Opteron)? -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)