[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Concerns about AMD64 port

* Markus Spitzli (markus@spitzli.org) wrote:
> I prefere a proper solution instead a of quick implementation.  

One does not preclude the other.  There's no reason we can't do a quick
implementation now *and* continue working towards multiarch.  The
64bit-native port is unlikely to take all that much time and work for it
will probably be shared between the native port and the mutliarch work.

I think everyone agrees that a nice multiarch system would be good to
have.  It'd be useful for more than just amd64, as many have pointed
out.  Some of us, however, would like to just get a quick-n-dirty port
going so that we can use our 64bit systems as 64bit.  You are more than
welcome to wait for the amd64 multiarch to be hammered out and to work
if you'd prefer to.

> Most of the Application can't be portet to a 64bit system in a fast way i think.
> especially third party products. in native 64bit port you can't use them till
> they 
> are portet. Or do anyone think that a proprietary Game (doom, quake, ....) will
> be 
> portet? i don't think so. 

The doom engine is open source now, isn't it?  Regardless though, GL
games have other problems that have nothing to do with the mixed vs.
native Debian amd64 discussion.  Some non-game binary-only applications
for Linux (such as Oracle) were ported to 64bit many years ago.  I doubt
it'd be very difficult to get it to compile 64bit correctly for an AMD64
system.  In fact, I expect Oracle will do that once people start asking
for it, if they havn't already.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: