Debian Bug report logs - #575761
x86 architecture names are confusing

Package: release-notes; Maintainer for release-notes is Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>;

Reported by: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>

Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 02:03:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: lenny, patch, squeeze

Done: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Toggle useless messages

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#575761; Package release-notes. (Mon, 29 Mar 2010 02:03:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 29 Mar 2010 02:03:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: x86 architecture names are confusing
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 02:59:30 +0100
Package: release-notes
Severity: normal
Tags: squeeze lenny

The release notes use the long architecture names 'AMD64' and 'Intel
x86' for our architectures 'amd64' and 'i386'.  The name 'AMD64'
sometimes confuses users with Intel x86-64 chips, who instead download
the installer or CD images for ia64.  This is a waste of time and
bandwidth for all concerned.  The name 'Intel x86' is also inaccurate
in that the i386 architecture runs on 32-bit x86 processors from many
vendors.

The long names should be changed in coordination with www.debian.org
(#575760).

Ben.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
  APT prefers proposed-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'proposed-updates'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-3-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#575761; Package release-notes. (Mon, 29 Mar 2010 19:51:11 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Simon Paillard <simon.paillard@resel.enst-bretagne.fr>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 29 Mar 2010 19:51:11 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #10 received at 575761@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Simon Paillard <simon.paillard@resel.enst-bretagne.fr>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>, 575760@bugs.debian.org, 575761@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#575760: x86 architecture names are confusing
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 21:27:55 +0200
Hi,

[CC the other Bug# against release-notes]

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 02:52:55AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Package: www.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> 
> Various pages use the long architecture names 'AMD64' and 'Intel x86'
> for our architectures 'amd64' and 'i386'.  The name 'AMD64' sometimes
> confuses users with Intel x86-64 chips, who instead download the
> installer or CD images for ia64.  This is a waste of time and
> bandwidth for all concerned.  The name 'Intel x86' is also inaccurate
> in that the i386 architecture runs on 32-bit x86 processors from many
> vendors.
> 
> I recommend the names '32-bit PC' and '64-bit PC' - they are not
> pedantically correct, but people should understand what they mean.

Or: 32-bit PC (i386) | 64-bit PC (amd64)
(in order to keep in mind the official name in the archive).

I fully agree. We received many reports/doubts of users on debian-www.

For the record, the subject has been discussed in November:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-www/2009/11/threads.html#00005
FJP position: http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2009/11/msg00515.html

The point of FJP is however to keep consistency between displayed names
and architecture name.
It may be relevant to change amd64 to something else, but may need
much larger changes in Debian..

IMO, it's still better to minimize errors during the first step in
getting to Debian, at the cost of the users doubts when getting
some_package_amd64.deb.

> Whatever you do, please avoid any vendor-specific names (including
> 'IA32' which is almost unknown outside of Intel manuals).
> 
> At least the following pages use these names:
> 
> http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/
> http://www.debian.org/ports/
> http://www.debian.org/mirror/submit
> http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/adding-form
> 
> Most other pages using these names appear to be part of the
> installation manual or release notes, which can be dealt with
> separately.

-- 
Simon Paillard




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#575761; Package release-notes. (Mon, 29 Mar 2010 22:06:12 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 29 Mar 2010 22:06:12 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #15 received at 575761@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
To: Simon Paillard <simon.paillard@resel.enst-bretagne.fr>
Cc: 575760@bugs.debian.org, 575761@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#575760: x86 architecture names are confusing
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 22:19:33 +0100
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 21:27 +0200, Simon Paillard wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> [CC the other Bug# against release-notes]
> 
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 02:52:55AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Package: www.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> > 
> > Various pages use the long architecture names 'AMD64' and 'Intel x86'
> > for our architectures 'amd64' and 'i386'.  The name 'AMD64' sometimes
> > confuses users with Intel x86-64 chips, who instead download the
> > installer or CD images for ia64.  This is a waste of time and
> > bandwidth for all concerned.  The name 'Intel x86' is also inaccurate
> > in that the i386 architecture runs on 32-bit x86 processors from many
> > vendors.
> > 
> > I recommend the names '32-bit PC' and '64-bit PC' - they are not
> > pedantically correct, but people should understand what they mean.
> 
> Or: 32-bit PC (i386) | 64-bit PC (amd64)
> (in order to keep in mind the official name in the archive).
> 
> I fully agree. We received many reports/doubts of users on debian-www.
> 
> For the record, the subject has been discussed in November:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-www/2009/11/threads.html#00005
> FJP position: http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2009/11/msg00515.html
> 
> The point of FJP is however to keep consistency between displayed names
> and architecture name.

His major point seems to be that the current layout sucks, which I fully
agree with.  I would suggest using lists or tables with one line per
architecture, sorted in reverse order of popularity (according to
popcon).

> It may be relevant to change amd64 to something else, but may need
> much larger changes in Debian..
[...]

The official short names really cannot be changed.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#575761; Package release-notes. (Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:36:11 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:36:11 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #20 received at 575761@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Cc: 575761@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#575761: x86 architecture names are confusing
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:34:22 +0200
Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> writes:

> Package: release-notes
> Severity: normal
> Tags: squeeze lenny
>
> The release notes use the long architecture names 'AMD64' and 'Intel
> x86' for our architectures 'amd64' and 'i386'.  The name 'AMD64'
> sometimes confuses users with Intel x86-64 chips, who instead download
> the installer or CD images for ia64.  This is a waste of time and
> bandwidth for all concerned.  The name 'Intel x86' is also inaccurate
> in that the i386 architecture runs on 32-bit x86 processors from many
> vendors.
>
> The long names should be changed in coordination with www.debian.org
> (#575760).

Changed to what?

MfG
        Goswin




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#575761; Package release-notes. (Mon, 19 Apr 2010 17:30:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 19 Apr 2010 17:30:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #25 received at 575761@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
To: Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de>
Cc: 575761@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#575761: x86 architecture names are confusing
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:26:32 +0100
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 06:34:22PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> writes:
> 
> > Package: release-notes
> > Severity: normal
> > Tags: squeeze lenny
> >
> > The release notes use the long architecture names 'AMD64' and 'Intel
> > x86' for our architectures 'amd64' and 'i386'.  The name 'AMD64'
> > sometimes confuses users with Intel x86-64 chips, who instead download
> > the installer or CD images for ia64.  This is a waste of time and
> > bandwidth for all concerned.  The name 'Intel x86' is also inaccurate
> > in that the i386 architecture runs on 32-bit x86 processors from many
> > vendors.
> >
> > The long names should be changed in coordination with www.debian.org
> > (#575760).
> 
> Changed to what?
 
In #575760 I suggested '32-bit PC' and '64-bit PC'.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
                                                              - Albert Camus




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#575761; Package release-notes. (Sun, 02 Jan 2011 13:51:08 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>. (Sun, 02 Jan 2011 13:51:08 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #30 received at 575761@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>
To: Simon Paillard <simon.paillard@resel.enst-bretagne.fr>, 575760@bugs.debian.org
Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>, 575761@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#575760: x86 architecture names are confusing
Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2011 14:46:58 +0100
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 21:27:55 +0200, Simon Paillard wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> [CC the other Bug# against release-notes]
> 
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 02:52:55AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Package: www.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> > 
> > Various pages use the long architecture names 'AMD64' and 'Intel x86'
> > for our architectures 'amd64' and 'i386'.  The name 'AMD64' sometimes
> > confuses users with Intel x86-64 chips, who instead download the
> > installer or CD images for ia64.  This is a waste of time and
> > bandwidth for all concerned.  The name 'Intel x86' is also inaccurate
> > in that the i386 architecture runs on 32-bit x86 processors from many
> > vendors.
> > 
> > I recommend the names '32-bit PC' and '64-bit PC' - they are not
> > pedantically correct, but people should understand what they mean.
> 
> Or: 32-bit PC (i386) | 64-bit PC (amd64)
> (in order to keep in mind the official name in the archive).
> 
> I fully agree. We received many reports/doubts of users on debian-www.
> 
What's the status here?  Can we make the change in the website and the
squeeze release notes now?  It seems everyone agrees the current names
are confusing and Ben's suggestions would be an improvement.

Cheers,
Julien
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#575761; Package release-notes. (Sun, 02 Jan 2011 14:45:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>. (Sun, 02 Jan 2011 14:45:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #35 received at 575761@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>
To: 575761@bugs.debian.org
Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>, Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>
Subject: [PATCH] Change x86 architecture names to be less confusing
Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2011 15:42:50 +0100
i386: Intel x86 → 32-bit PC
amd64: AMD64 → 64-bit PC

Bug#575761

Reported-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>
---
We shouldn't actually do this until the d-www folks agree to change it
on their side too.

 en/whats-new.dbk  |    4 ++--
 release-notes.ent |    4 ++--
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/en/whats-new.dbk b/en/whats-new.dbk
index 19b8b05..6065a4d 100644
--- a/en/whats-new.dbk
+++ b/en/whats-new.dbk
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ The following are the officially supported architectures for &debian;
 <itemizedlist>
 <listitem>
 <para>
-Intel x86 ('i386')
+32-bit PC ('i386')
 </para>
 </listitem>
 <listitem>
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ S/390 ('s390')
 </listitem>
 <listitem>
 <para>
-AMD64 ('amd64')
+64-bit PC ('amd64')
 </para>
 </listitem>
 <listitem>
diff --git a/release-notes.ent b/release-notes.ent
index 1bca68b..933d0d9 100644
--- a/release-notes.ent
+++ b/release-notes.ent
@@ -83,10 +83,10 @@ Remember, this is XML; the *first* definition of an ENTITY wins.
 
 <!-- proper nouns for architectures -->
 <!ENTITY arch-title "<phrase arch='alpha'>Alpha</phrase><!--
-		  --><phrase arch='amd64'>AMD64</phrase><!--
+		  --><phrase arch='amd64'>64-bit PC</phrase><!--
 		  --><phrase arch='armel'>ARM EABI</phrase><!--
 		  --><phrase arch='hppa'>PA-RISC</phrase><!--
-		  --><phrase arch='i386'>Intel x86</phrase><!--
+		  --><phrase arch='i386'>32-bit PC</phrase><!--
 		  --><phrase arch='ia64'>IA-64</phrase><!--
 		  --><phrase arch='mips'>Mips</phrase><!--
 		  --><phrase arch='mipsel'>Mipsel</phrase><!--
-- 
1.7.2.3





Added tag(s) patch. Request was from Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Sun, 02 Jan 2011 14:51:09 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#575761; Package release-notes. (Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:24:07 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>. (Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:24:08 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #42 received at 575761@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org>
To: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>, 575761@bugs.debian.org
Cc: Simon Paillard <simon.paillard@resel.enst-bretagne.fr>, 575760@bugs.debian.org, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Bug#575761: Bug#575760: x86 architecture names are confusing
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 22:21:14 +0900
Hi,

On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 02:46:58PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 21:27:55 +0200, Simon Paillard wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > [CC the other Bug# against release-notes]
> > 
> > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 02:52:55AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > Package: www.debian.org
> > > Severity: normal
> > > 
> > > Various pages use the long architecture names 'AMD64' and 'Intel x86'
> > > for our architectures 'amd64' and 'i386'.  The name 'AMD64' sometimes
> > > confuses users with Intel x86-64 chips, who instead download the
> > > installer or CD images for ia64.  This is a waste of time and
> > > bandwidth for all concerned.  The name 'Intel x86' is also inaccurate
> > > in that the i386 architecture runs on 32-bit x86 processors from many
> > > vendors.
> > > 
> > > I recommend the names '32-bit PC' and '64-bit PC' - they are not
> > > pedantically correct, but people should understand what they mean.
> > 
> > Or: 32-bit PC (i386) | 64-bit PC (amd64)
> > (in order to keep in mind the official name in the archive).
> > 
> > I fully agree. We received many reports/doubts of users on debian-www.
> > 
> What's the status here?  Can we make the change in the website and the
> squeeze release notes now?  It seems everyone agrees the current names
> are confusing and Ben's suggestions would be an improvement.

Actions needed to fix this on we page is to edit following file (I am
not webwml expert)
CVS/debian/webwml/english/releases/squeeze/release.data.

It has:

%arches = (
        i386    => 'Intel x86',
        sparc   => 'SPARC',
#       alpha   => 'Alpha',
        powerpc => 'PowerPC',
        amd64   => 'AMD64',
#       arm     => 'ARM',
        armel   => 'EABI ARM',
        hppa    => 'HP PA-RISC',
        ia64    => 'Intel IA-64',
        mips    => 'MIPS (big endian)',
        mipsel  => 'MIPS (little endian)',
        s390    => 'IBM S/390',
);

This needs to be changed and reordered to:

# order are from http://popcon.debian.org/
# Thus vender neutral :-)
%arches = (
        i386    => '32-bit PC (i386)',
        amd64   => '64-bit PC (amd64)',
        armel   => 'EABI ARM (armel)',
        powerpc => 'PowerPC (powerpc)',
        sparc   => 'SPARC (sparc)',
#       arm     => 'ARM (arm)',
        ia64    => 'Intel IA-64 (ia64)',
        hppa    => 'HP PA-RISC (hppa)',
#       alpha   => 'Alpha (alpha)',
        mipsel  => 'MIPS (little endian) (mipsel)',
        s390    => 'IBM S/390 (s390)',
        mips    => 'MIPS (big endian) (mipsel)',
);

This order is the current popcon data order:
http://popcon.debian.org/
So we will not ask user to look through long list.

I hope this fixes non-optimal order and word issue on Debian web page
technically.  But we first agree on what wording are we using.

I like nonpedantic 32-bit PC/64-bit PC.

"EABI ARM" may be better to use "ARM (armel)" since we are not shipping
old arm any more.


Osamu 

Osamu




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#575761; Package release-notes. (Tue, 04 Jan 2011 22:33:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Andrei Popescu <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>. (Tue, 04 Jan 2011 22:33:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #47 received at 575761@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrei Popescu <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>
To: Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org>, 575761@bugs.debian.org
Cc: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>, Simon Paillard <simon.paillard@resel.enst-bretagne.fr>, 575760@bugs.debian.org, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Bug#575761: Bug#575760: x86 architecture names are confusing
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 00:28:20 +0200
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Ma, 04 ian 11, 22:21:14, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> 
> This needs to be changed and reordered to:
> 
> # order are from http://popcon.debian.org/
> # Thus vender neutral :-)
> %arches = (
>         i386    => '32-bit PC (i386)',
>         amd64   => '64-bit PC (amd64)',
>         armel   => 'EABI ARM (armel)',
>         powerpc => 'PowerPC (powerpc)',
>         sparc   => 'SPARC (sparc)',
> #       arm     => 'ARM (arm)',
>         ia64    => 'Intel IA-64 (ia64)',
>         hppa    => 'HP PA-RISC (hppa)',
> #       alpha   => 'Alpha (alpha)',
>         mipsel  => 'MIPS (little endian) (mipsel)',
>         s390    => 'IBM S/390 (s390)',
>         mips    => 'MIPS (big endian) (mipsel)',
> );
> 
> This order is the current popcon data order:
> http://popcon.debian.org/
> So we will not ask user to look through long list.
> 
> I hope this fixes non-optimal order and word issue on Debian web page
> technically.  But we first agree on what wording are we using.
> 
> I like nonpedantic 32-bit PC/64-bit PC.
> 
> "EABI ARM" may be better to use "ARM (armel)" since we are not shipping
> old arm any more.

May I also suggest "Intel IA-64 Itanium (ia64)", to try to prevent users 
from confusing ia64 with amd64.

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#575761; Package release-notes. (Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:03:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Documentation Team <debian-doc@lists.debian.org>. (Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:03:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #52 received at 575761@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org>
To: Andrei Popescu <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>
Cc: 575761@bugs.debian.org, Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>, Simon Paillard <simon.paillard@resel.enst-bretagne.fr>, 575760@bugs.debian.org, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Bug#575761: Bug#575760: x86 architecture names are confusing
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 00:00:07 +0900
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:28:20AM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
...
> > This order is the current popcon data order:
> > http://popcon.debian.org/
> > So we will not ask user to look through long list.

Order is not important since it get reordered.

> > I hope this fixes non-optimal order and word issue on Debian web page
> > technically.  But we first agree on what wording are we using.
> > 
> > I like nonpedantic 32-bit PC/64-bit PC.
> > 
> > "EABI ARM" may be better to use "ARM (armel)" since we are not shipping
> > old arm any more.
> 
> May I also suggest "Intel IA-64 Itanium (ia64)", to try to prevent users 
> from confusing ia64 with amd64.

This is good idea, On Intel site, "Intel Itanium" is used together and
IA-64 follows it.  So I chose "Intel Itanium IA-64".  Maybe, Release
note may need some change though. 

I realized Release note only used arch name in () for 32-bit PC and
64-bit PC, I only added there.

I just commited changes to webwml.

Regards,

Osamu




Reply sent to Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility. (Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:18:07 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Notification sent to Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>:
Bug acknowledged by developer. (Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:18:07 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #57 received at 575761-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>
To: Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org>, 575761-done@bugs.debian.org
Cc: Andrei Popescu <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>, Simon Paillard <simon.paillard@resel.enst-bretagne.fr>, 575760@bugs.debian.org, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Bug#575761: Bug#575760: x86 architecture names are confusing
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 16:15:06 +0100
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Thu, Jan  6, 2011 at 00:00:07 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:

> I just commited changes to webwml.
> 
And I just changed the release notes for squeeze.  Thanks.

Cheers,
Julien
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <owner@bugs.debian.org> to internal_control@bugs.debian.org. (Thu, 03 Feb 2011 07:32:35 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.


Debian bug tracking system administrator <owner@bugs.debian.org>. Last modified: Wed Apr 23 07:23:21 2014; Machine Name: beach.debian.org

Debian Bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.