[llvmlinux] Unmatching Arch String for Aarch64/arm64

Behan Webster behanw at converseincode.com
Thu Jan 30 22:21:38 UTC 2014


On 01/30/14 14:09, PaX Team wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2014 at 10:34, Behan Webster wrote:
>
>>> I don't buy this argument... we're still using x86_64 (which is a pain
>>> to type), but what do I know... ;)
>> Agreed. That is also a stupid name, though at least it is descriptive
>> and obvious. But since the port was done primarily by Intel, they chose
>> it...
> offtopic but intel did exactly nothing for what became known as x86_64,
> it was all amd's initiative and work with various vendors (MS & SuSE at
> least) that resulted in support in their respective OSs (with SuSE moving
> their work upstream of course). amd foolishly didn't seize the opportunity
> to name their new arch properly, amd64 came long after x86_64/x86-64/etc
> got established in source code and other literature and that's what we're
> stuck with (but many still refer to it as amd64).
Really? I thought Debian was using "amd64" long before it was referred
to as x86_64...

But, you're right. A lot of the original work must have been done by AMD...

Behan

-- 
Behan Webster
behanw at converseincode.com



More information about the LLVMLinux mailing list