Re: not pending anymore
On Fri, 2004-06-04 at 08:54, Alex Perry wrote:
> Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>
> > My gripe with it is the pimping of AMD. It's a different class than
> > i386, since there you only have one letter and not the whole name, and
> > historical errors should not prevent us from doing the right thing
> > today. (Else, all linux ports should be renamed to linux-$ARCH, which I
> > don't think they should (pre-multiarch, at least. ;))
> >
>
> My memory tells me that "a64" is the name of an ARM-derived
> architecture. Don't even be tempted.
>
> Currently, if I want to run the architecture, I _have_ to buy the
> processor from AMD. Odd that we want to have the technical name
> indicate what processor you need to acquire in order to get it to work.
>
> The real reason why the current name for the arch is vendor specific is
> because, if you recall, AMD invited Intel to sign up for a vendor
> neutral name that they could both use ... and thereby avoid confusing
> differentiation in the marketplace. Intel refused, which indicates to
> me that Intel _wants_ us to use two different names for the respective
> architectures. If we are going to take vendor preferences into account
> in any way whatsoever, we should take _both_ vendors (the real one with
> products and the virtual one that has only released marketing
> literature) into account ...
>
> I propose that politicizers of this argument take the _correct_ approach
> to _their_ perceived problem:
> 1. Shut up whining until there is a non-AMD processor available
> 2. Read up the documentation on what Intel is going to do different (eg
> execute bit)
> 3. Start a second porting project for whatever Intel's name is at
> release time
> 4. When multiarch comes along, the two will be mostly interoperable anyway
>
> Just another $0.02 ... this is getting expensive ...
> Alex.
> This mail listing should be about working on the problems with porting Debian to this architecture, not a continual spam junk of complaining about the name of it. AMD came out with the Opteron, it works with both 32 bit and 64 bit applications. Give credit where it's due. AMD64, only architecture out there currently.
Reply to: