Messages in this thread | | | From | (H. Peter Anvin) | Subject | Re: PNP design philosophy? | Date | 9 Mar 2000 18:02:56 -0800 |
| |
Followup to: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0003091601390.1186-100000@asdf.capslock.lan> By author: "Mike A. Harris" <mharris@meteng.on.ca> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > It is specific. I read it as a 386 system. i486 is a 486 > system. > > And how would saying ix86 making it more specific? > > Actually, "x86" or "ia32" are the appropriate terms. If you are > refering to the Intel 32 bit linux port (or original depending on > your viewpoint and level of pragmatism), it is _mislabeled_ > "i386" for legacy reasons. Calling your machine an > "i386" because of the name linux gives it architecturally is a > good way to be misunderstood. Use "x86" or "ia32" to refer to > Intel architecture as opposed to sparc/alpha, etc.. >
No, it really isn't. The i386 is a *very* different architecture than the 8086, i186, or i286. The name IA-32 is a very recent construct.
-hpa -- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |