From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 11 07:11:15 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A71A16A4CF for ; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 07:11:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from lakemtao06.cox.net (lakemtao06.cox.net [68.1.17.115]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C47943D1F for ; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 07:11:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eqe-support@cox.net) Received: from smtp.central.cox.net ([172.18.52.54]) by lakemtao06.cox.net SMTP <20031211151113.KDQG24575.lakemtao06.cox.net@smtp.central.cox.net>; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 10:11:13 -0500 From: To: ticso@cicely.de Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 10:11:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20031211151113.KDQG24575.lakemtao06.cox.net@smtp.central.cox.net> cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Re: why support alpha?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 15:11:15 -0000 thx, now I get it. there is a lot more to it than I thought. > > From: Bernd Walter > Date: 2003/12/10 Wed PM 09:31:32 EST > To: eqe@cox.net > CC: freebsd-current@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: why support alpha?? > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 08:53:55PM -0500, eqe@cox.net wrote: > > On Wednesday 10 December 2003 08:47, you wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 04:54:13AM -0500, eqe@cox.net wrote: > > > > On Wednesday 10 December 2003 00:44, you wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 10:43:02PM -0500, eqe@cox.net wrote: > > > > > > > > Yes, you have a point here but I never said alpha hackers are working in > > > > vain. I merely tryed to imply that their efforts could better serve the > > > > freebsd community by concentrating our efforts on just platforms that are > > > > more mainstream in the server market. I personally would stop dev. on > > > > anything > > > > > > If you want mainstream go Windows. > > you must be joking, but if not you have missed the point, read again. > > It's exactly what you said about architecture about OS in exactly the same > hard words - just that you don't understand the architecture part. > In the same way you don't want a mainstream OS I don't want a mainstream > architecture. > > alpha is the only 64 bit platform supported by FreeBSD-stable right > now - so it's the only supported 64 bit platform with production > quality. > If your application requires 64 bit then you have to take the risk > of -current or buy an alpha - but applications that realy require > 64 bit are almost always incompatible with risks. > Hardware is bought with the intend to use it for several years - more > time than 4.x will give. > > You can call alpha dead as long as you like, but I can tell you for > shure that almost all alpha hardware that is build today will life > much longer than most x86 hardware build today. > Why think about optimzing for a current x86 CPU when you already know > that you can't buy them next month? > > You also shouldn't forget that most of must development is in fact > development about 64bitness, strong alignemnt and so on. > Everything of them is required for other 64bit platforms as well. > You don't want to be limited by 32bit x86 systems for ages right? > For the same reasons I'm very happy about recent sparc64 progress > because it has put a lot more developers on the 64bit table. > > -- > B.Walter BWCT http://www.bwct.de > ticso@bwct.de info@bwct.de > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >