> Patryk Zadarnowski wrote:
> > FreeBSD when that happens. In the meantime, the only alternative would be to
> > convince Intel to give someone their IA-64 SimOS, but there's an extermely
> > slim chance of that happening (from talking to someone on the IA-64 team.)
> >
>
> An alternative to IA-64 is the alpha processor. Last time
> I checked, FreeBSD ran just peachy on a 64-bit processor. ;-)
> Check out Cmpaq's test drive program.
I don't know... I'm still to get it to boot on mine (NetBSD runs fine, but for
some bizzare reason, FreeBSD insists on a serial console ;) Anyway, alphas are
boring compared to Itanium. What else can you say about a chip with 3MB of L3
cache on the die, a four clock cycle latency to carry the signal from one end
of the chip to the other, and the main design limitation being the US power
supplies? :) Not to mention the fact that Intel isn't even planning to release
any single-cpu system....
Pat.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
