On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 10:24:04PM +0000, Scott James Remnant wrote: > Because it's a 64-bit version of an already supported architecture. > Having "ppc" and "ppc64" would be fine, as would having "powerpc" and > "powerpc64". Having "powerpc" and "ppc64" is inconsistent.
and deviating from an already established standard isn't? i'm wondering
what the actual benefits of having a similarly (powerpc/powerpc64)
named port are, apart from being aesthetically pleasing.
sean
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
