Bug#340298: www.debian.org/ports unclear about ia64
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 06:00:48PM +0800, Randolph Chung wrote:
> > Without further any warning/information about that other 64bit architecture
> > intel, amd etc are producing: amd64. A *lot* of people try to use ia64
> > installation media to install Debian on their Opteron's etc, and then mail
> > (for example) debian-cd that the cd is broken and doesn't boot.
> I am not disputing that the wording can be improved, but please note:
> > The paragraph in question could and IMHO should be more elaborate, like,
> > saying it's Intel *alpha* 64, aka Itanium,
> What is "Intel alpha 64"? I've never heard of such a thing :-)
> ia64 != Itanium, just as Linux != RedHat.
That's why I put debian-ia64 in the loop, because I don't much more than
the bare minimum about the architecture in question. It also makes it
hard for me to provide a factually correct patch. Please suggest some
wording that *is* correct, then. I don't know how to do it.
> > The fact that i386 is also called ia32 above, without any introduction to
> > what ia32 means, isn't helping at all of course. If it doesn't serve
> > anything, I strongly suggest to drop the name of 'ia-32', I've never
> > heard of it before, while eh, I've been an i386 users for quite some time.
> Well, ia32 is a very common name. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IA-32
Among Computer Hardware Engineers, maybe, but I surely never heard of it
(I know, statistical sample of one, but still. And I *am* thoroughly
familiar with Linux). And a quick poll amongst a handful of
computer-savy people (computer science students and physics students) at
my university suggests I'm not the only one who doesn't know what a ia32
is, despite having lots of them (and the Physics department's main
shell server being an ia64 even).
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)