On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 05:42:30PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > First, what I'm suggesting: two new packages for sarge and one modified > package. They would allow 64-bit applications using a small set of standard > libraries to run on an otherwise i386 installation, and allow 64-bit > applications to be built. I would love that. I admin some bioinformatics clusters, and some phylogenetics (tree-of-life reconstruction) programs use tree data structures full of pointers that, with gcc-3.3, are faster in 32bit mode than 64bit mode. (It would really kick ass if AMD64 had a mode with the extra registers, but 32bit pointers. Then pointer-heavy data structures would be faster.) Anyway, being able to easily compile in 32 or 64bit and benchmark would be very useful. Also, I wouldn't have to statically link 64bit binaries that are faster in 64bit mode, and users wouldn't have to deal with the chroot. (not that it's much trouble with dchroot :) So, for me (and my ~dozen users) at least, this really would be useful. If you can't get it into sarge, I don't mind tracking unstable for some packages on the cluster (it's not quite what some would call a "production" system). It would rock to have it in sarge :) -- #define X(x,y) x##y Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X(peter@cor , des.ca) "The gods confound the man who first found out how to distinguish the hours! Confound him, too, who in this place set up a sundial, to cut and hack my day so wretchedly into small pieces!" -- Plautus, 200 BC
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature