From owner-freebsd-ppc Mon Mar 18 17: 7: 8 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rpi.edu (mail.rpi.edu [128.113.22.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A33AE37B404; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 17:07:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail.rpi.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g2J16vC8123432; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:06:57 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <200203182356.g2INu4r80682@freefall.freebsd.org> <20020319000224.GA22582@electricjellyfish.net> Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:06:55 -0500 To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , freebsd-ppc@FreeBSD.ORG From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: send-pr categories & FreeBSD/powerpc or -ppc Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, Benno Rice Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.3 (www dot roaringpenguin dot com slash mimedefang) Sender: owner-freebsd-ppc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 1:20 AM +0100 3/19/02, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: >Garrett Rooney writes: > > the powerpc port has a mailing list > > (freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org) > >Ah, I was looking for "freebsd-powerpc" since the >platform is actually called powerpc. I think it >is a bad idea to use two different names for it; >we should either rename the mailing list to >freebsd-powerpc or rename sys/powerpc to sys/ppc. I think des makes a good observation here, assuming the port is currently called 'powerpc'. It would probably make sense to change the name of the mailing list. What do other people think? (note that I'm copying this to the freebsd-ppc mailing list... :-) The following came in just when I was going to hit the "send" button: At 11:11 AM +1030 3/19/02, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >On Tuesday, 19 March 2002 at 12:29:02 +1200, Benno Rice wrote: > > I'd prefer to change the mailing list name if anything. > >And I was going to say the opposite. FWIW, it's called >ppc in the Linux source tree. And since IBM persists in >calling some of the processors POWER, powerpc isn't that >accurate either. If "powerpc" isn't accurate, then how can "ppc" be? :-) However, to follow up, it seems that NetBSD has a few different 'ppc' platforms, with 'macppc' looking like it is the busiest. OpenBSD also has a 'macppc' port. I guess that brings up the question of how we see our port. Is it specific to "mac powerPC" machines? Or are we expecting the same port to work for other powerPC/POWER machines? (How about those POWER-4 machines that IBM talks about? :-) Either a powerpc name or some ppc name will be fine with me, but it does make sense that the mailing-list name should match the port-name. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ppc" in the body of the message