Re: Opteron support in dpkg
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, John Goerzen wrote:
> I agree. Let's look at some of the arguments that have been raised
> recently:
>
> * amd64 ties it to AMD, but we expect Intel to release a compatible
> processor as well.
>
> This does not seem to have bothered us when dealing with i386, which
> is Intel's chosen name, as opposed to K7 or others that have
> developed extensions to Intel's specs. If AMD designed the spec,
> I see no reason to avoid giving them credit just as we have done
> with Intel or others. Besides, this is the chosen name for the
> platform.
>
> The fact that AMD released i386-compatible CPUs didn't lead anyone
> to suggest renaming i386 to x86 or ia32. In fact, the existance of
> AMD's compatible CPUs predated the existance of Debian itself.
>
> * x86-64 corresponds better with GNU tools and the kernel.
>
> No, it doesn't. They use the underscore. The ensuing confusion
> promises to be worse.
>
> Besides, GNU tools often say i486 for our i386 distro.
>
> * We could use the underscore later.
>
> That means switching our name twice more. A huge pain. Plus, we
> don't even know if that is the case.
>
> * Others use x86-64.
>
> No, they use x86_64. Actually, plenty of others use amd64, including
> Gentoo, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Mandrake, and some other smaller distros.
>
> * Renaming is easy.
>
> As Goswin has pointed out, it's not all that easy and in fact is
> quite time-consuming.
>
> I am all for amd64.
>
not that my opinion matters, but x86-64.org changed to amd64.org -
obviously for some sort of reason. couldn't that be used as some sort of
sign to get everything aligned to that? freebsd calls it amd64 (as does
netbsd) already.
i believe the intel compatible systems will be using the "64-bit extension
technology" which would then mean x86-64 (or _64) might make more sense.
but as other folks have said before, AMD has been under the i386/x86 style
banner created by intel a long time ago, perhaps for these hybrid 32/64
bit platforms, intel will have to buck up and live under the "amd64"
banner.
to sum it up, i agree with John's final line. it needs to be finalized now
before there's 3 different styles of it floating around, and with sites
like x86-64.org already announcing they've changed to amd64.org, i think
that shows the proper direction to move.
- mike
Reply to: