Scott James Remnant wrote: >On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 01:57 +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote: >> >> The decision to use the name 'ppc64' is based on the LSB and it is >> consistent with the decision of all other distributions I know of. >> >But it isn't consistent with Debian's previous decision on the PowerPC >port. In particular, the LSB mandates "ppc32" for what we call >"powerpc".
And why precisely do we need to be consistent with an architecture name chosen in the past? Names seem to be chosen arbitrarily; if we can agree with other distros and the LSB on what we call a new 64-bit PowerPC, that seems like a no-brainer to me... -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mature Sporty Personal More Innovation More Adult A Man in Dandism Powered Midship Specialty -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
