Re: Opteron support in dpkg
On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 02:21:02AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Alex Perry <alex.perry@qm.com> writes:
>
> > I like John's summary (below). To add my 2c, as someone who has been
> > putting in sweat on this port,
> ...
> > "sparc" "i386" and similar names. For complete consistency, which was
> > the asserted reason for the name change, we should use "opteron" as
> > the architecture on that basis.
>
> Opteron is the first alternative that wouldn't cause problems and
> isn't braindead. - and _ in the name are not acceptable from a
> technical point.
I'm not sure it makes sense. I have an Athlon64. Why would I assume
that something named "opteron" would work for me? To me, that seems
similar to naming something "pentium-ii".
> Since John says what we all want to hear lets listen to him. Very good
> suggestion. .)
<grin>
Reply to: