On 12/17/12 1:52 AM, Henning Heinold wrote:
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 04:11:15PM -0500, Bill Traynor wrote:
On Dec 16, 2012 5:57 AM, "Robert P. J. Day" <[email protected]> wrote:
perusing adt-installer recipe and files and i notice there are a few
mentions of "powerpc" whereas it seems that "ppc" is the correct
architecture abbreviation. obviously doesn't hurt anything but it
might be confusing for people reading the source.
Isn't the architecture just called Power now?
Nope, POWER is the midiron architecture from IBM, where POWERPC is a subset of
POWER.
From power.org:
What is happening to the PowerPC wordmark and logo?
The PowerPC wordmark, as referencing the PowerPC instruction set architecture
(ISA) and products based on that ISA, will continue to exist. However, we
encourage everyone to use the new Power Architecture trademark and the new
logos to help establish a more consistent voice in the marketplace for the
Power Architecture platform.
In otherwords when talking about the overall architecture platform "Power" is
correct. When referring to the specific (older) PowerPC ISA, PowerPC is acceptable.
The way I've done it is, depending on usage, either refer to it as "Power" (i.a.
ia32, MIPS, ARM) when discussing the 'architecture family'. (The FAQ item above
seems to indicate 'Power' is the right term.) "PowerPC" is still used when
talking about older processors...
"powerpc" when talking about the GNU architecture, and 'ppc' when abreviating
the GNU architecture (such as a package arch, CPU tuning, etc.) Much of it is
historical so you should see all three (or four) terms used through the
documentation when discussing different parts.
--Mark
Bye Henning.
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
