On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 01:03:29AM +0100, Christian Biere wrote:
> That would also be a bad choice because "intel" means virtually nothing.
> There's StrongARM, IA-64 and what not. In any case, it would give the
> impression that AMD et al. were second rate or incompatible which is pretty
> much BS. The terms "i586" (Pentium) and "i686" (Pentium Pro and newer) are

Thanks.  Very good point.

BTW, is the meaning of i586 and i686 written up somewhere in the NetBSD
docs?  I didn't see "I386_CPU" in config(8), anyway.  What is the Pentium4,
still i686?

> >  Many of us had to bite the bullet on NEC98s 5 years ago.
> 
> "Port for an Port" or what? ;)

See the bottom of "http://www.netbsd.org/Ports/#history" or
"http://www.nisoc.or.jp/~karl/netbsd-pc98/" if Japanese is okay.  This is
how I got into NetBSD in the first place.  In those days NetBSD rocked! --
not that it doesn't still, just more competition now.  My first NetBSD
machine was a VX (286 machine) with an IOData cpu upgrade.  "Cbus"
protected memory was 8MB.  Iirc it took 3days+ to compile a kernel. 8-)

-- 
henry nelson
  WWW_HOME=http://yuba(dot)ne(dot)jp/(tilde)home/