On Wednesday 17 February 2010 11:59:05 Camaleón wrote: > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 11:47:44 +0000, Lisi wrote: > > On Tuesday 16 February 2010 15:48:03 Camaleón wrote: > >> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 10:34:09 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > [snip] >> >> > I.e. just use your regular 32bit Intel install (i386/x86/i686/IA32 or > >> > whichever name you like to use to refer to it). > >> > >> In Debian is called "i386". > > > > Running Debian Lenny: > > l...@tux:~$ uname -a > > Linux Tux 2.6.26-2-686 #1 SMP Wed Feb 10 08:59:21 UTC 2010 i686 > > GNU/Linux l...@tux:~$ > > Debian uses "i386" for naming the whole 32 bits architecture: > > http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/ch02s01.html.en#id3060035 > > Other distros use "x86" for i386/i486/i586/i686 packages and "x86_64" for > 64 bits. Don't ask me why, I didn't decide those names :-)
I understand what you are saying, and would not argue with it. - but why then does my system announce itself as i686?? Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201002171307.51123.lisi.re...@gmail.com
