Quoting Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.org>:
> It's not really the objective of the footnote. The text is about the
> fact that even you are not using a 386 CPU (for example a 486 or a
> Pentium) you are still using an i386 architecture.
Oh.
OK. Then I totally missed that one :-( (sorry)
Rereading the footnote with that in mind, I can see the true meaning.
But I still do find it a little bit misleading: shouldn't we explicit the fact
that we are talking about newer versions of an x86 CPU ?
Either by emphasizing the "386" word, or saying something like "even if you are
running FreBSD on a newer x86, such as a pentium, this is going to be i386.."
Might not a reader with another architecture altogether think, reading the
sentence "even if you are not running FreeBSD on an Intel 386 CPU, this is going
to be i386", that "i386" should appear even if she is using a sparc, or whatever
?
Of course I may very well be the only one to misread that kind of info ;-)
(in which case, just ignore my remarks)
gregory
_______________________________________________
freebsd-doc@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-doc
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-doc-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"