lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 29 May 2008 11:35:08 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <>
cc:	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <>,
	Dave Jones <>,
	Linux Kernel <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>
Subject: Re: [X86] Fix up silly i1586 boot message.

On Thursday 2008-05-29 02:13, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
>> > uname reports i686 on these chips.  The rest is ridiculous.
>> Intel started it first with picking up a ridiculous number for the family
>> ID for the P4 line.  There is no technical justification for not keeping
>> these numbers consecutive.  Or keeping it at 6 actually if the P4 is meant
>> to be seen by software as the Pentium Pro and the rest of the P6 gang.
> Yes, this is what we eventually ended up doing as causing fewest compatibility
> problems.  For the message in question, it's better to be consistent with
> uname.

Then again, should not all of the i?86 names be collapsed,
much like there is only "sparc" and "sparc64" for
the actual sparcv7, sparcv8, sparcv9, sparcv9a pseudo-arches
used in, for example rpm, etc.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists