Re: Concerns about AMD64 port
> Because there's no gain for some packages, and it wastes mirror
> space. Some packages, like say a window manager, really don't need
> more than 2G RAM, and are not time critical either.
I don't think you're taking the proper perspective. If every "not
time critical" application is 10% less efficient than it could be, a
typical desktop user could see serious degradation in responsiveness.
I'd argue that the sum is always slower than the slowness of the
individual parts would suggest.
> However, this might be difficult to decide in some cases, people
>might use packages for unusual tasks; also having too much 32 bit
>stuff might lead to duplicately loaded libraries. Therefore, I
>wouldn't mind if simply everything was built for amd64.
I agree on this point: for the most part, I do not run proprietary
software, and if I had to I could run it in a 32-bit chroot under a
biarch kernel. I'd rather that approach than take three extra years
trying to figure out perfect solutions to the biarch distribution
problems, at which point use of 32-bit *proprietary* software might be