From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Sep 3 20:45:07 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id UAA00954 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 3 Sep 1997 20:45:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from neptune.ajc.state.net (neptune.ajc.state.net [204.120.158.168]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00940 for ; Wed, 3 Sep 1997 20:44:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from AJC.State.Net (saturn.ajc.state.net [204.120.158.166]) by neptune.ajc.state.net (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA01694; Wed, 3 Sep 1997 21:39:47 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <340E1ED3.14734EE6@AJC.State.Net> Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 21:37:07 -0500 From: Al Johnson Organization: Al Johnson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wes Peters CC: Doug White , questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 'uname -m' not alpha? (was Re: 'uname -m' not i586?) References: <199709040204.UAA13569@obie.softweyr.ml.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk My system replies with "alpha" as opposed to the suggested "axp" Looks like the mimicing is already taking place. -- Al Wes Peters wrote: > Doug White writes: > > The `machine' identifies the architecture under which the kernel is > > designed to run under. Since FreeBSD is designed to run under the Intel > > i386 architecture (386 and compatible processors) it will report 'i386.' > > This is also used to define machine-dependent code in the kernel to > > compile, ie there is a /usr/src/sys/i386 heirarchy. In the future DEC > > Alpha port there will be a machine type `alpha' in addition to `i386.' > > Hmm... Does anyone know what Digital UNIX (nee OSF/1) reports as the > architecture for this machine? I suspect it is probably "axp", and > contend we should probably mimic the DEC system if it's not too big a > change at this point. > > For those who remember when DEC ruled the world of minicomputers, AXP > has a nice "callback." Rumor has it, when DEC applied for a trademark > on "Alpha" and was told they couldn't trademark it, the "AXP" moniker > was brought up by some of the old-timers on the hardware side. Why > "AXP?" It stands for (according to the scuttlebutt) "Almost eXactly > Prism." I'll leave it up to Bill Pechter to explain what Prism was. > > -- > "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" > > Wes Peters Softweyr LLC > http://www.xmission.com/~softweyr softweyr@xmission.com