Does "mac" mean "powerpc mac only"? I rather thought it meant "apple macintosh", regardless of cpu. I ask because Austin has just gone through and changed lots of "mac" bugs to "pc" even though the bugs were on Intel macs, which just seems wrong.
Does "mac" mean "powerpc mac only"? I rather thought it meant "apple macintosh", regardless of cpu. I ask because Austin has just gone through and changed lots of "mac" bugs to "pc" even though the bugs were on Intel macs, which just seems wrong.
I agree with you, this change seems suspect. Austin, are you trying to distinguish PPC bugs from x86 ones with this, or what? --Juan
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Juan Lang <juan.lang(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Does "mac" mean "powerpc mac only"? I rather thought it meant "apple macintosh", regardless of cpu. I ask because Austin has just gone through and changed lots of "mac" bugs to "pc" even though the bugs were on Intel macs, which just seems wrong.
I agree with you, this change seems suspect. Austin, are you trying to distinguish PPC bugs from x86 ones with this, or what? --Juan
I've seen the same change made a few times in the past (I'd have to search for it). Looking at other bugzilla's, Mozilla puts Intel Mac bugs under PC...after all, since they've moved to x86, for all intents and purposes, Intel Macs are PC's (especially if running Linux rather than OS X). Those running OS X still can be identified as such by the OS field. Yes, my goal was to separate x86/ppc bugs. -- -Austin
Austin English wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Juan Lang <juan.lang(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Does "mac" mean "powerpc mac only"? I rather thought it meant "apple macintosh", regardless of cpu. I ask because Austin has just gone through and changed lots of "mac" bugs to "pc" even though the bugs were on Intel macs, which just seems wrong. I agree with you, this change seems suspect. Austin, are you trying to distinguish PPC bugs from x86 ones with this, or what? --Juan
I've seen the same change made a few times in the past (I'd have to search for it). Looking at other bugzilla's, Mozilla puts Intel Mac bugs under PC...after all, since they've moved to x86, for all intents and purposes, Intel Macs are PC's (especially if running Linux rather than OS X). Those running OS X still can be identified as such by the OS field.
Yes, my goal was to separate x86/ppc bugs.
Then we should change the tab to read ppc rather than mac. Thanks, Scott Ritchie
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Scott Ritchie <scott(a)open-vote.org> wrote:
Austin English wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Juan Lang <juan.lang(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Does "mac" mean "powerpc mac only"? I rather thought it meant "apple macintosh", regardless of cpu. I ask because Austin has just gone through and changed lots of "mac" bugs to "pc" even though the bugs were on Intel macs, which just seems wrong. I agree with you, this change seems suspect. Austin, are you trying to distinguish PPC bugs from x86 ones with this, or what? --Juan
I've seen the same change made a few times in the past (I'd have to search for it). Looking at other bugzilla's, Mozilla puts Intel Mac bugs under PC...after all, since they've moved to x86, for all intents and purposes, Intel Macs are PC's (especially if running Linux rather than OS X). Those running OS X still can be identified as such by the OS field.
Yes, my goal was to separate x86/ppc bugs.
Then we should change the tab to read ppc rather than mac.
I know this is an old thread, but I'd like to (finally) make some progress on this... I'd really like to see the Macintosh verb removed/renamed, since an Intel Mac is really just a PC. The OS field tells us it's a Mac, and, for example, a Linux OS on an Intel Mac is no different (to Wine) than a regular x86/x86_64 PC running Linux. Dan and I discussed it, and figured renaming the hardware to reflect the architecture would be more descriptive: Macintosh -> ppc32 PC -> x86 PC-x86-64 -> x86-64 sun -> sparc How does that sound? -- -Austin
Nate Gallaher wrote:
Austin English wrote:
Dan and I discussed it, and figured renaming the hardware to reflect the architecture would be more descriptive: Macintosh -> ppc32 PC -> x86 PC-x86-64 -> x86-64 sun -> sparc
How does that sound?
+1 here.
Sounds like a solid idea.
Looks good to me too. Vitaliy.
Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
Nate Gallaher wrote:
Austin English wrote:
Dan and I discussed it, and figured renaming the hardware to reflect the architecture would be more descriptive: Macintosh -> ppc32 PC -> x86 PC-x86-64 -> x86-64 sun -> sparc
How does that sound?
+1 here.
Sounds like a solid idea.
Looks good to me too.
Vitaliy.
+1 James McKenzie
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com>wrote:
Dan and I discussed it, and figured renaming the hardware to reflect the architecture would be more descriptive: Macintosh -> ppc32 PC -> x86 PC-x86-64 -> x86-64 sun -> sparc
How does that sound?
-- -Austin
If your going to re-work this I would also add ARM to the list, their has been some work to port Wine to the ARM processor lately. Anyone have any objections to adding a ARM selection to the list? ARM -> RISC Cheers, Tom
participants (8)
-
Austin English -
Dan Kegel -
James McKenzie -
Juan Lang -
Nate Gallaher -
Scott Ritchie -
Tom Wickline -
Vitaliy Margolen