Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 09:20:37 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en index.xsl Message-ID: <20040921162037.GA13085@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20040921095539.GE4451@orion.daedalusnetworks.priv> References: <200409201934.i8KJYfcS036447@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040921.054126.07648742.hrs@eos.ocn.ne.jp> <20040920211839.GA15066@hub.freebsd.org> <200409201753.18974.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20040921074025.GA1368@dragon.nuxi.com> <20040921095539.GE4451@orion.daedalusnetworks.priv>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 12:55:39PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > - x86 compatible, AMD64 compatible, Alpha, IA-64, PC-98 > > - and UltraSPARC® architectures. > > + x86 compatible, x86-64 (aka. AMD64) compatible, Alpha/AXP, > > + IA-64, PC-98 and UltraSPARC® architectures. .. > This one seems nice. It's hard to see the real changes if wrapping is > redone though. The contraction `aka' is probably something we'd like to > avoid too. How about this one? > > : <p>FreeBSD is an advanced operating system for > : - x86 compatible, AMD64 compatible, Alpha, IA-64, PC-98 > : + x86 compatible, x86-64 or AMD64 compatible, Alpha/AXP, IA-64, PC-98 The "or" isn't really correct "x86-64/AMD64 compatible" would be closer, but people may say that is more confusing than the "aka". Is "x86-64 (AMD64) compatible" better? -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040921162037.GA13085>