Adding k9 and k10 to bsd.cpu.mk

[David O'Brien]

On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 08:32:20PM -0300, JoaoBR wrote:
> On Friday 31 August 2007 02:38:52 Björn König wrote:
> > JoaoBR wrote:
> > > but athlon64-x2 for S940 and athlon64-am2 for sse3 capable cpus would be
> > > kind of understandable for all
> > > [...]
> > > venice as said in another mail is not clear for all people and certainly
> > > it does not appear on the box or elsewhere
> >
> > I think the names "athlon64-x2" and "athlon64-am2" would be most confusing
> > and ambiguous, because the socket has nothing to do with the feature set
> > of the CPU. Athlon64 X2 CPUs are not only available for socket 940, but
> > also for AM2 and 939. There are SSE3 CPUs that fit into 940, AM2 and 939.
> >
> 
> well, the x2 thing I wasn't  thinking it through and you are right,
> what I meant to say that so far as I know all S939-X2 are SSE3 capable
> and rev-E at least as all am2 are
> 
> so eventually, athlon64-E would be more appropriate (with proper man

Why?  athlon64-E  should apply to athlon64 rev's F & G?  k8-sse3 seems
best - with aliases for athlon64-sse3 and opteron-sse3.

> opterons are not easy but it is already kind of advanced cpu so could be 

Why are Opteron's any harder?

-- 
-- David  (obrien at FreeBSD.org)
Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
A: Why is top-posting (putting a reply at the top of the message) frowned upon?
Let's not play "Jeopardy-style quoting"