On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 6:14 AM, Michael Matz <m...@suse.de> wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 20 Jan 2015, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> > ia32 is confusing because ia64 (a well known term) sounds related but >> > can't be farther away from it, and it's also vendor specific. Our >> > traditional i386 seems better to me (although it has its own problems, >> > but I'm not aware of any better abbreviation in the wild that's vendor >> > neutral and specifically means the 32bit incarnation of the x86 >> > architecture). >> > >> >> The problem with i386 is it is a real processor. When someone says >> i386, it isn't clear if it means the processor or 32-bit x86. > > That's what I meant with its own problems :) But ia32 seems worse to me > than this IMO. >
At least, IA-32 is clear, although IA-64 may be confusing :-). FWIW, i386 is also vendor specific. -- H.J.
