On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 05:41:26AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> "David E. O'Brien" <obrien@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
> obrien> Log:
> obrien> Use consistent wording.
..
> - x86 compatible, AMD64 and Intel EM64T, Alpha, IA-64, PC-98
> + x86 compatible, AMD64 compatible, Alpha, IA-64, PC-98
..
> I would like to make it clear that FreeBSD supports EM64T
> by using the Intel's architecture name because the word
> AMD64 can confuse the users. Is that unacceptable?
If I can list AMD Athlon, AMD K6, AMD K5, VIA, Cyrix, Transmeta, National
Semiconductor, IBM, etc... in the list rather than "x86 compatible". For
Alpha we would need to add Samsung, who also made some Alpha dirivitives.
For Sparc64 we would need to add Fujitsu.
Where does it stop?
People owning Intel EM64T machines well know that it is a copy of the
AMD64 platform.
--
-- David (obrien@xxxxxxxxxxx)
_______________________________________________
cvs-doc@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-doc
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "cvs-doc-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
|
