David Southwell wrote:
>> David Southwell wrote:
>>> Hi every one
>>> My understanding is that one uses the amd64 for building a kernel for
>>> systems with Intel Quad Core processors.
>>> It is helpful when naming conventions follow a logical strand. I mean why
>>> does freebsd use a single manufacturer's name to represent a genre?
>>> David
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
>>> "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
>> One would use the amd64 version of FreeBSD on 64-bit platforms (apart
>> from the itanium platforms).
>> the amd64 or x86-64 instuction set has been designed by amd, which
>> called it amd64.
>> Intel implemented amd's design in their EM64T or "Intel 64" instruction
>> set, which is compatible with amd's implementation(mostly IS amd's
>> implementation).
>> As such, amd64 is as valid a platform name as IA64(or Itanium) is.
> That is undoubtably true -- what it also means is that both names are equally 
> logical or illogical depending upon your point of view.
> My view is that both are equally illogical because they are tied to a 
> manufacturer rather than to function. Names are best chosen to facilitate 
> selection by single step logic that encapsulates what the name represents 
> rather than by having an abstruse historical context that has neglible 
> bearing 
> upon current function.
> my 2 p
> But lets not get worked up about this <chuckles>
> david
You make a good point. It would be more "logical" and maybe even more
"correct" to call it x86-64.
This would however imply that any x86-64 implementation is supported.
This is probably the case now, though i am unsure if freeBSD amd64 works
on for instance via platforms.
Since x86-64 isn't exactly an ISO standard, and amd64
it's not strange to name the branch that has been developed to work on
amd's implementation of x86-64 is called amd64.
Besides, I am a real AMD fanboy when it comes to processors... so why
would I want that? ;-)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to