From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 21:14:43 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Paul Mackerras Message-ID: <20050812041443.GC3187@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <20050811195927.GX3187@smtp.west.cox.net> <17148.7234.193140.997481@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <17148.7234.193140.997481@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Becky Bruce , linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: RFC: proposed arch/powerpc directory structure List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 01:49:22PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Tom Rini writes: > > > I'm a bit ppc64-ignorant, but isn't 'pSeries' just a regular > > OpenFirmware-containing ppc64 box (like Maple) ? How about just 9xx/ > > Ummm, no, not exactly. The distinctive thing about pSeries is the > hypervisor interfaces. And in fact most pSeries boxes aren't > 970-based, rather POWER4/4+/5. If you want to generalize, we could > call the directory "papr" (for Power Architecture Platform > Requirements, the name of the document that describes the pSeries > platforms) rather than pSeries, but I suspect that would just confuse > people. :) Ok. How about 9xx/ instead of classic64 ? -- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/