From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Sep 4 07:49:11 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id HAA02824 for questions-outgoing; Thu, 4 Sep 1997 07:49:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell.monmouth.com (root@shell.monmouth.com [205.164.220.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA02816 for ; Thu, 4 Sep 1997 07:49:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from i4got.lakewood.com (fh-ppp16.monmouth.com [205.164.221.48]) by shell.monmouth.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA16895; Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:46:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from pechter@localhost) by i4got.lakewood.com id KAA08282 (8.8.5/IDA-1.6); Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:48:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Pechter Message-ID: <199709041448.KAA08282@i4got.lakewood.com> Subject: Re: 'uname -m' not alpha? (was Re: 'uname -m' not i586?) In-Reply-To: <199709040204.UAA13569@obie.softweyr.ml.org> from Wes Peters at "Sep 3, 97 08:04:13 pm" To: softweyr@xmission.com (Wes Peters) Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:48:52 -0400 (EDT) Cc: questions@freebsd.org Reply-to: pechter@lakewood.com X-Phone-Number: 908-389-3592 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 3 Sep 1997, 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. > I wish I could -- but I can't. I'll crosspost to comp.sys.dec to see if there's any answer. Well, the story is Prism was a multiprocessor Risc system built at DEC's research facility that was killed by DEC. (Terry Shannon of Shannon Knows DEC fame may have more info in comp.sys.dec. He always does 8-) I spent most of my time in the PDP11 and Vax worlds... and research that didn't come up with a commercial product didn't get into the Field Service rumor mill. I seem to remember that there were rumors that this project had a glass (fiber) backplane and was a screaming multiprocessor system. I remember that about at this time Cutler bailed to Microsoft. Perhaps this one his project. There's Prism docs at the DEC Research home page... Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Pechter | 17 Meredith Drive Tinton Falls, NJ 07724 | 908-389-3592 pechter@lakewood.com | Save computing history, give an old geek old hardware. This msg brought to you by the letters PDP and the number 11.