Re: why bookworm isn't called deb12?
Bret Busby wrote:
>
> With bits and bytes, one strange thing that I remember, is that, in 1985, in
> Australia, a particular computer was introduced, that had a 32 bit processor
> with 8 bit buses. It was a Motorola 68008 CPU, and, I could not understand
> why a company would produce a 32 bit CPU wit 8 bit buses. The computer was
> named the Telecom Computerphone, and, it was an oddity in itself.
Compatible parts make for cheaper systems.
In the late 70s and early 80s, most mass-produced systems were 8-bit
microprocessors with an 8-bit bus, connecting to peripherals that assumed
an 8-bit bus.
Motorola's 68000 line had an internal 32 bit architecture, which made
the CPU both performant and expensive. But a manufacturer of systems
could contain the overall cost by using 8-bit devices outside of the
CPU. The first generation was hybrid 16/32 bit internally, and came in
variants selected for cost vs performance: 8, 16 or 32 bit external bus.
The 2nd generation 68030 was 32 bits inside and out, and had a hardware
memory manager, which meant it was the first one that we, sitting here 36
years later, would think of as a system with enough features that we could
reasonably compile software for it. Debian supported 68030s and later
from 2.0 through 4.0, though by that time it was clearly a doomed target.
-dsr-
Reply to: