Matthew Dillon was considering completing AMD64 support for the next release, and it looks like he might be starting on it.
Â Update: No, that’s disklabel work.Â Thanks to ‘anonymous’ for indirectly pointing that out.
Would be cool, because most servers out there are either shipped with Opterons or Itanium 64’s (and usually contain more than 4 GB RAM). I can of course test this once it’s in a working stage.
Intel’s marchitecture for AMD64-compatibles was “EM64T” (apparently “Intel 64,” now), shipped under the Xeon/Pentium #/Core brands, so I’m wondering if this means you’re actually using Itaniums (“IA-64”) in the wild. :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Em64t#Differences_between_AMD64_and_Intel_64 looks interesting for people like me who (for lack of anything interesting supporting 64-bit mode) haven’t been paying attention.
I know the difference between the two, but somewhere I read about “pc64” ports meaning x86_64 and ia64.
Yeah, I think it was the time of all the header reorganization, when Matt created the platform, machine, machine_arch, etc. values.
Shiningsilence.com uses a AMD processor (socket 754), so I’d be happy to have have support for it – not that I’ve noticed any CPU performance issues to date.
(will not be published)
DragonFly BSD Digest