| 1 |
On 10-10-2008 04:21:23 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: |
| 2 |
> > >> amd64-linux |
| 3 |
> > >> x64-openbsd |
| 4 |
> > >> x64-solaris |
| 5 |
> > > |
| 6 |
> > > Is there a special reason why you're using "x64" instead of "amd64" |
| 7 |
> > > in those cases? (IMO x64 is the most stupid name for the x86_64 |
| 8 |
> > > architecture) |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > AFAIK, that's not amd64/x86_64, but rather ia64, aka itanic aka |
| 11 |
> > itanium. At least, that's how I'd interpret them since I've seen that |
| 12 |
> > abbreviation made before, particularly since there's already amd64 in |
| 13 |
> > context. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> No, x64 is the marketing name Microsoft made up for x86_64 (aka amd64, |
| 16 |
> ia32e and Intel 64), as "Windows for x86_64" doesn't sound that sexy, |
| 17 |
> and was later adopted by Sun and others. |
| 18 |
> ia64/Itanium doesn't have any other alias names AFAIK. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
We simply found that: |
| 21 |
- amd64 is misleading |
| 22 |
- em64t would be more to the point for some? |
| 23 |
- x64 is what the vendors (Apple, Sun) advertise themselves |
| 24 |
- amd64 doesn't make any sense for a Mac |
| 25 |
- x64 is more like x86, whereas the complement of amd64 would more be |
| 26 |
i386 or ia32, but we wanted to avoid x86_64, x8664, so x64 |
| 27 |
- we were changing keywords anyway |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 32 |
Gentoo on a different level |
Archives