• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Intel XNU bug report
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Intel XNU bug report


  • Subject: Re: Intel XNU bug report
  • From: Kevin Van Vechten <email@hidden>
  • Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 13:10:34 -0700


On Aug 9, 2006, at 1:02 PM, Graham J Lee wrote:

On 9 Aug 2006, at 12:53, Chad Leigh wrote:

Would be nice if Darwin/Apple etc used a name that is already in use by others so a to not offer more confusion.

how about EM64T, or "washing machine controller chip with a few extensions"? Seriously, AMD invented this stuff and they call it x86-64, so I think that's a reasonable decision and already in use. i38664 would have been wrong. NetBSD, RedHat/Fedora/Centos use x86_64.

The kernel and developer tools have standardized on "x86_64" for the name of the Mach-O architecture. Using x86_64 is probably the most straightforward way to describe 64-bit on Intel as supported by Mac OS X.


- Kevin
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden


References: 
 >Re: Intel XNU bug report (From: almisr <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Intel XNU bug report (From: Eric Albert <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Intel XNU bug report (From: Chad Leigh <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Intel XNU bug report (From: Graham J Lee <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Intel XNU bug report
  • Next by Date: Maximum number of syscalls per thread?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Intel XNU bug report
  • Next by thread: Re: Intel XNU bug report
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread