Re: Port Name: A Vote
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 03:50 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Gwenole Beauchesne <gbeauchesne@mandrakesoft.com> writes:
>
[snip]
> > Nowadays, choice is more complicated with EM64T platforms getting
> > around. Since both are ISA compatible (modulo 3dNow!), it would not
> > make sense to introduce an "em64t" port name, at first sight. Besides,
> > it's not fair to use "amd64" either in that case. Objectively, we
> > would be left with "x86_64" which exactly means "64-bit extended x86
> > architectures". After all, there were even LSB 1.x drafts mentioning
> > x86_64, though you can read AMD64 in 2.0 drafts instead.
>
> Great, got an url for that? This would be a major argument towards amd64.
http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/specs.php
http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/booksets/LSB-Core-AMD64/LSB-Core-AMD64.html
That wasn't very hard to find. And it only refers to AMD64. No
mention of x86_64 that I could find.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net
Jefferson, LA USA
"Vegetarians eat Vegetables, Humanitarians frighten me."
Unknown
Reply to: