Re: AMD64 for sarge [Re: <rant> Package: ftpmasters, Severity: serious, ...]

[Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>]

Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@gwolf.cx> writes:

> Goswin von Brederlow dijo [Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 06:58:00PM +0200]:
>> The size of a sensible distribution should also factor into this (but
>> its hard to make rules for that).
>> 
>> What I mean is the following: Once multiarch is added after sarge is
>> out ports for s390x, powercp64, sparc64, mips64 and mipsel64 can be
>> done as partial ports. Only a small portion of packages (+depends)
>> would get ported, those that might require the larger address space
>> like postgresql.
>> 
>> Any of those ports could consist of maybe 300 packages only. Its
>> unreasonable to port more packages since they would be slower and
>> waste resources (ram, disk and mirror space). Forcing an s390x port to
>> have >90% ported before inclusion would be insane.
>
> ...Although, once again, this is not true of AMD64, as there _is_
> point in recompiling everything, as the processor runs better in 64
> bit mode than in 32 bit mode. And there is still (news, news!!) a huge
> i386 installed user base, so we cannot drop support for it. The only
> option, IMHO, is to have both architectures as independent, maybe just
> somehow linked in the future... But every package will have to be
> compiled for both.
>
> Greetings,

Sure. But multiarch is way past sarge anyway.

MfG
        Goswin