64 bit linux on Intel T9600

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 10:48:21AM -0400, Jamon Camisso wrote:
> we'd all be better of pretending like itanium never happened. I'd hazard  
> a guess that no more than a handful of people on this list have used  
> one. Maybe that's naive and it needed to happen to spur development of  
> the x86-64 instruction set, I dunno.

Well it's hard to pretend the alpha, high end mips, and probably a few
others weren't exterminated by that piece of junk.  SGI might have
screwed up and died even without the itanium, but it sure didn't help.

> But I'm sure that all IA-64 has caused anyone is headache, heartache, a  
> hole in their wallet, and no small amount of confusion when it comes to  
> x86_64/amd64. The question comes up a few times a day in various  
> distros' irc channels.

Yeah, designing a CPU based on assumptions about the future of compiler
development was not intel's brightest move.  I think almost all the
assumptions they used turned out to be wrong (at least so far).

-- 
Len Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists