Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 00:46:58 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> Cc: doc-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en index.xsl Message-ID: <20040921074658.GB1368@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20040920180128.W21773@pooker.samsco.org> References: <200409201934.i8KJYfcS036447@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040921.054126.07648742.hrs@eos.ocn.ne.jp> <20040920211839.GA15066@hub.freebsd.org> <200409201753.18974.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20040920180603.6dc01457@localhost> <20040920180128.W21773@pooker.samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 06:03:59PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Tom Rhodes wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 17:53:18 -0400 > > This was already fought over several weeks ago, and we decided that since > NetBSD, OpenBSD, and a number of Linux's use 'amd64' in their > documentation that we would also. I _thought_ that we also agreed to > mention 'EM64T' and 'IA32e' in the same context to clarify what we support > since there have been a number of questions about this from end users. It was not my understanding that everywhere "AMD64" was mentioned, we would also mention "EM64T". Our FreeBSD/AMD64 release notes and HARDWARE docs, and http://www.freebsd.org/platforms/amd64.html is the place to document that Intel calls it "EM64T" or "IA32e". -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040921074658.GB1368>