[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Who decides arch names?

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 04:24:52PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> >   * it doesn't include unnecessary marketing connotations, and avoids
> >     the issue whether we even *can* use AMD's name in vain
> I fail to see how mentioning the name of an architecture is using
> unnecessary marketing connotations.  Perhaps we ought to make these
> changes:

It is also called ia32e so which should we call it x86-64, amd64, or
ia32e... ;)

> >   * it doesn't *quite* match the others "x86-64" vs. "x86_64"
> Which is also a serious problem that is going to lead to endless
> confusion.

I don't remember all the reasons given but both _ and - can cause
problems in various ways. One reason not to use _ is that it is used
to split on in Debian. A reason not to use - is that is used to separate
arch-os triplets. I think there were some other reasons given as well.

> > The second is due to "_" being used as a filename separator; I'd like to
> > investigate what actually *relies* on this and potentially change the
> > architecture at a later date (still before archive addition) to x86_64
> > to totally match the others -- we'll see how that plays out.
> Pick something and stick with it.  Don't make us change twice.
> What I'm really upset about here is that this is a major decision that
> was taken without even attempting to gather input on the lists.  If the
> consensus was to rename it, fine, but no attempt at gathering info was
> made on your part.  You should immediately s/x86-64/amd64/ in the dpkg
> tree and only change it back after discussion here.

For what its worth the archtable entry was incorrect in any case since
dpkg --print-gnu-build-architecture was printing out incorrect
information. What is up for discussion appears to be whether it should

x86_64-linux-gnu	x86-64		x86_64

x86_64-linux-gnu	amd64		x86_64

Chris Cheney

BTW - Scott you still forgot to fix the header doc on what the three
fields are supposed to mean. Recall you told me field 3 was for
--print-gnu-build-architecture not --print-architecture...

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: