From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 23 22:45:38 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEC2916A4CE; Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:45:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pittgoth.com (14.zlnp1.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.149.111]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D99AC43D3F; Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:45:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mobile.pittgoth.com (ip68-230-188-82.dc.dc.cox.net [68.230.188.82]) (authenticated bits=0) by pittgoth.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j1NMjZKw052006 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 23 Feb 2005 17:45:36 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 17:45:28 -0500 From: Tom Rhodes To: John Baldwin Message-ID: <20050223174528.624bae59@mobile.pittgoth.com> In-Reply-To: <200502231733.43563.jhb@FreeBSD.org> References: <200502230110.j1N1ASPc000377@repoman.freebsd.org> <200502231310.12153.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20050223220420.GB32679@dragon.nuxi.com> <200502231733.43563.jhb@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.0.0 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd6.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: obrien@FreeBSD.org cc: Marcel Moolenaar Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/examples/etc make.conf X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:45:39 -0000 On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 17:33:43 -0500 John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday 23 February 2005 05:04 pm, David O'Brien wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 01:10:12PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > > > On Wednesday 23 February 2005 03:19 am, David O'Brien wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 06:04:43PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > > > > > Log: > > > > > > Add 'nocona' to the list of Intel ia64 CPUs and k8 to the AMD > > > > > > CPUs. > > > > > > > > > > Nocona is not an ia64 processor. It's a xeon (=ia32) processor with > > > > > EM64T. > > > > > > > > It isn't "with EM64T". Or was the i386 an "80286 with registers" as > > > > something special? A Nocona is a 64-bit Xeon. > > > > > > Actually, a 386 was a 286 with paging at first. :) A Xeon is certainly > > > an ia32 processor (esp. when compared to ia64), and just as paging was an > > > extension to the protected mode already present in the 286, one can think > > > of long mode as an extension of 386 protected mode with PAE. > > > > Yes, and was there a huge marketing compain to call it "286 with Paging > > Technology"? No. It was simply the "i386". > > > > > Take a chill pill, > > > his e-mail didn't even contain the word "AMD" and you still flew off the > > > handle. > > > > Sorry, didn't realize I needed to see the world "AMD" in an email to be > > able to respond to an email. It is ridiculous the amount of confusion > > Intel is causing EM64T users. > > I think you are seeing Intel marketing demons behind every shadow when they > actually aren't there all the time and jumping down people's throats at the > mere mention of anything related to Intel + amd64. The sky is not falling, > please slow down and calm down. Ok, I've seen back and forth discussion about marketing this and CPUs that. What I want to know: is the current version correct? Does it make people happy? :) -- Tom Rhodes