From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 6 00:28:21 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AC0F37B401 for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 00:28:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F7F843F3F for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 00:28:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from des@ofug.org) Received: by flood.ping.uio.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id 4E0EC530E; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 09:28:18 +0200 (CEST) X-URL: http://www.ofug.org/~des/ X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this message do not necessarily coincide with those of any organisation or company with which I am or have been affiliated. To: Rahul Siddharthan References: <20030605165217.A388@online.fr> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 09:28:18 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20030605165217.A388@online.fr> (Rahul Siddharthan's message of "Thu, 5 Jun 2003 16:52:17 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1001 (Gnus v5.10.1) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Peeve: why "i386"? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 07:28:21 -0000 Rahul Siddharthan writes: > Why do all the BSDs continue to refer to the 32 bit Intel architecture > as i386 Because that's what everybody else calls it. > even when they typically won't even install on an i386 any > more? They do. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org