On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 5:02 AM, Martin Jungowski <martin at rhm.de> wrote: > On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 17:08:24 -0500 Peter A wrote: >> Over the past few years, i386 has become a synonym for 32bit rather than >> "it will run on a 80386". The RPM package for the kernel is correctly >> labeled as i686, its just the name of the distro that remained i386. > > That's why I'm asking whether or not it would make more sense to rename > the distro to i686 instead. It might make perfect sense in a very > colloquial way but from a technical point of view i386 suggests 32-bit > 80386 compatibility. Either way, it's just a suggestion and general > wondering since I wasn't aware of what i386 had become in the US. It actually makes more sense to call the distro x86, better to peg it to a particular architecture then a CPU release. Then one has x86 (32-bit) and x86_64 (64-bit). But this is all decided by Redhat, CentOS is just a RHEL recompilation with the intellectual property stripped out. -Ross