From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 25 13:57:45 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20DB716A41F for ; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:57:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rosti.bsd@gmail.com) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.201]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD6C343D53 for ; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:57:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rosti.bsd@gmail.com) Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id s1so2102282nze for ; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 05:57:44 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=OuUNP4JomZOmexojbzTEJ2Kw5e8mAdPl1DSWSMbBVaE1oWYhdUxpHWkjqBMtHa3q3X51VQG37ZKk6zCqYHnoWH3GTGfbtp0Zkh7uhXd/COovMXuaF4f8IGRuNoSEzWy1N/C2rYjKxVw99nT53p4e9JzEgQOcpTIJeUZGCiGX2V0= Received: by 10.64.148.16 with SMTP id v16mr384030qbd; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 05:57:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.220.6 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 05:57:43 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <59e2ee810511250557j1b4ff01dsa7e93d3c73a86121@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 15:57:43 +0200 From: Rostislav Krasny To: Christer Hermansson MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: i386 do not support i386 X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:57:45 -0000 > FreeBSD 6.0R don't support 386 processors according to the release > notes, maybe it's time to change the name of the i386 platform to the > x86 platform. 16-bit 8086, 8088, 80186 and 80286 are x86 processors too. 80386 was the first 32-bit processor from Intel, and it had many other significant architectural changes. I believe the i386 architecture name is righteous for 80386 successors, even without the 80386 particular support. That's just my IMHO.