RE: Renaming this list into debian-amd64
Let me clarify...
The architecture formerly named x86-64, now named amd64, was developed as an open standard, therefore it's not something we can license. AMD64 is the new name of x86-64. That's the architecture, the instruction set, and the technology we use to bring that to market. x86-64 ceases to exist.
However, x86_64 still exists. It's the string in Linux describing the platform. Much in the same way that i386 and i586 refer to the x86 instruction set, x86_64 refers to the amd64 instruction set.
If Intel produces a product that uses the AMD64 specification, it will also run binaries built for ARCH=x86_64. ...but in the same way that Athlon XP & Athlon MP are x86 products, Intel's new processors would be AMD64 products.
I suggest consistency, plain and simple. If there exists a debian-i586 mailing list for discussing the x86 port, then this list should actually be called debian-x86_64 (with an alias to the old debian-x86-64 name). If such a list is called debian-x86, then this list should be called debian-amd64.
We don't care either way as long as it makes sense to you and to people looking for this mailing list.
From: Martin Jungowski [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 2:53 AM
Subject: Re: Renaming this list into debian-amd64
I think that's the point - x86-64 is an open standard and there are
rumors that Intel bought a license and is going to introduce an x86-64
AMD64 would mean it's only for 64-bit AMD CPUs, that's why I'd say we
should stick with x86-64
On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 12:30, Ian Norton wrote:
> I would tend to agree here,
> afaik the family is also known as k8,
> is it fair to say, that AMD64 is AMDs implelentation of x86-64, and IA64 is
> intels implemenatation of IA64 :-), some other chip company might implement
> x86-64 aswell, its all very odd,
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 12:45:54PM +0200, Martin Jungowski wrote:
> > I'd say it whould remain x86-64 since that is more technical. AMD64
> > sounds like a marketing thing to me, after all they don't call their
> > Athlon XP and Duron AMD32
> > On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 08:37, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > > * Martin Schulze <email@example.com> [2003-08-21 18:53]:
> > > > I wonder if it would be worth renaming this list into ?debian-amd64? which
> > > >
> > > > If nobody objects, I guess that I should assume (silent) acknowledgement and
> > > > ask listmaster people to rename this list and adjust the web archive.
> > >
> > > I agree with renaming it to -amd64. Just make sure there's an alias
> > > for -x86-64.
> > > --
> > > Martin Michlmayr
> > > firstname.lastname@example.org
> > >
> > --
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.12
> GCS dpu s--: a-- C++++ UL++ P+++ L+++ E--- W-- N+ o K w---
> O M-- V-- PS++ PE-- Y+ PGP+ t+++ 5++ X++ R+++ !tv b DI D----
> G++ e+ h++ r++ y+++
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
> ----- Message of the Hour ------
> Moooo :-)
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org