From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KoKcc-0000J2-8g for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:13:46 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C3DFAE0330; Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:13:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rabble.robbieab.com (rabble.robbieab.com [213.79.38.74]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83028E0330 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:13:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.65] (helo=pheonix) by rabble.robbieab.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KoKca-0007jT-5v for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:13:44 +0100 Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:13:38 +0100 From: Robert Bridge To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] New keywords for non-Gentoo Linux platforms Message-ID: <20081010171338.53e37deb@pheonix> In-Reply-To: <20081010175637.1e5e0b5e.genone@gentoo.org> References: <20081009181101.GE21770@gentoo.org> <20081010000500.b405d25b.genone@gentoo.org> <20081010042123.f5c2b7f9.genone@gentoo.org> <20081010071516.GA12145@gentoo.org> <20081010124819.GB12145@gentoo.org> <20081010175637.1e5e0b5e.genone@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.12.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/.Pko9hxKP2VqHG/EDnFeFrK"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: c40c88e0-e698-4db3-b1f6-01f4d457ec04 X-Archives-Hash: dd4f546529f9f05df511491a4d4ba487 --Sig_/.Pko9hxKP2VqHG/EDnFeFrK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:56:37 +0200 Marius Mauch wrote: > On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:48:19 +0200 > Fabian Groffen wrote: >=20 > > Whatever. Some of you seem to have some quite agressive dislikement > > to it. In the end it's just a name/tag. I guess I could live with > > anything, including c3p0. >=20 > Well, while I dislike x64 I'm more concerned about using different > names (amd64 and x64) for the same architecture (same would apply if > you had used i386 or ia32 in some cases instead of x86) and was just > checking if there was any functional reason for that difference. I would agree with this. As a user coming to the project, x64 is NOT the same arch as amd64, it has a different name! Select one name for the arch, and use it everywhere. Consistent naming is more important than having the name absolutely technically correct. And seeing as Gentoo uses amd64 for all those arches in the main tree with minimal problems, I personally would vote for using amd64 in -alt to retain consistency with the rest of Gentoo. Just my 2 cents. Rob. --Sig_/.Pko9hxKP2VqHG/EDnFeFrK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjvfzYACgkQZr0UhZgPVmxSGwCg+N12FzVsUUX367NxsNJdOjh5 BKcAoMtkbInCYwJ2/d9SmeK5msihYSIq =2r8+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/.Pko9hxKP2VqHG/EDnFeFrK--