Re: [OS 3.5] sysFtrNumProcessorID?

[Scott Johnson]

Jim Schram wrote:
> What's to fix? It's not broken.

Aw c'mon Jim, you know what he's asking, and we all know you can't say
anything specific about possible future hardware.  :-)

How about this way: if OS 3.5, or later versions, ever gets ported to
some hypothetical CPU that is neither an MC68328 nor an MC68EZ328, would
the sysFtrNumProcessorID feature be extended to indicate this?

-slj-