From owner-freebsd-ppc@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 15 15:52:28 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C05E537B401 for ; Thu, 15 May 2003 15:52:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpout.mac.com (smtpout.mac.com [17.250.248.97]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87B3B43FAF for ; Thu, 15 May 2003 15:52:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from leimy2k@mac.com) Received: from mac.com (smtpin08-en2 [10.13.10.153]) by smtpout.mac.com (Xserve/MantshX 2.0) with ESMTP id h4FMqOPa019622 for ; Thu, 15 May 2003 15:52:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mac.com (adsl-33-225-161.jan.bellsouth.net [67.33.225.161]) (authenticated bits=0) by mac.com (Xserve/8.12.9/MantshX 2.0) with ESMTP id h4FMoCFO010871; Thu, 15 May 2003 15:50:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 17:50:10 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552) To: "Aron J. Silverton" From: David Leimbach In-Reply-To: <3EC3B9BD.1020001@labs.mot.com> Message-Id: <954E6326-8727-11D7-8DDE-0003937E39E0@mac.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552) cc: Benno Rice cc: freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rename to freebsd-powerpc? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the PowerPC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 22:52:29 -0000 I think we are bike-shedding :). I am guilty as well. Dave On Thursday, May 15, 2003, at 11:01 AM, Aron J. Silverton wrote: > Benno Rice wrote: >> On Thu, 2003-05-15 at 21:56, David Leimbach wrote: >>> Well is the goal to support "all" PowerPC or just Macintosh? >> The goal is to be as generic as we can be. >>> There are a ton of VME PowerPC boards out there and some >>> RS/6000s that might be able to run FreeBSD as well. >> Yep. The issue is getting someone with the time to do the work who >> has >> access to that hardware. >>> What is the goal of people on this list? If its just mac-powerpc >>> perhaps that is the way to go? Of course if Apple actually releases >>> a Mac based on PPC-970 [64 bit PPC CPU] then we might get more >>> confusion >>> with Mac-PowerPC. :) >>> >>> Technically I think PPC is fine, powerpc is better but it may not >>> really be more specific :). >> And PPC is more specific? PowerPC is the name of the specification >> that >> all of these processors follow, whether it's the 32-bit or 64-bit OEA >> specifications or the weird variants like the IBM 4xx's they're all >> called PowerPC. Since we have a driver in the system called ppc which >> handles PC parallel port stuff, I've always made a concious effort to >> refer to the platform as powerpc rather than ppc. It's also the name >> of >> the directory in which the arch-specific code resides. >> The idea of the codebase is to support as many PowerPC platforms as we >> can, so I think that's the right name for it. > > Looking at two recent internal invoices on my desk, I see that we > refer to the chips as both PPC and PowerPC. I agree with Benno and > DES, however, with regards to changing the name of the list. For my > part, I'll probably continue to type PPC in conversation, though. ;-) > > I like the idea of keeping it as -powerpc as opposed to > differentiating between, for example, CompactPCI, MVME, Motorola, IBM, > Apple, Artesyn, or other distint PowerPC-based boards. Isn't that > what NetBSD does? It's probably not necessary here. I'd rather just > list the supported boards and architectures as a subset of > FreeBSD-PowerPC. > > Of course I have yet to contribute to the effort, so feel free to > ignore me. I do hope to contribute real soon now. > > Aron > > -- > Aron J. Silverton > Senior Staff Research Engineer > Motorola Laboratories, Networks and Infrastructure Research > Motorola, Inc. >