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

Re: Debian for x86-64 (AMD Opteron)



Hi,

On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 05:23:12PM +0200, Cyrille Chepelov wrote:

> Le Thu, Apr 10, 2003, à 04:43:57PM +0200, Emile van Bergen a écrit:
> 
> > > That way you could do something like:
> > > 
> > > # echo x86-64 >> /etc/dpkg/legal-archs
> > > # dpkg -i libgtk2-2.0-1_i386.deb
> > > # dpkg -i lib64gtk2-2.0-1_x8664.deb
> > 
> > To my untrained eye, this seems an excellent and very general solution.
> > 
> > As a slight but positive side effect, it also seems to open the way to
> > per-CPU optimized library versions; if you have a 686, you add 686 (or
> > 686-cmov) to /etc/dpkg/legal-archs, and can install either
> > 
> > libssl0.9.6-0.9.6c-2_i386.deb or 
> > libssl0.9.6-0.9.6c-2_i686.deb; 
> 
> That would be 
>   lib686ssl0.9.6-0.9.6c-2_i686.deb; 
> or 
>   lib686-cmovssl0.9.6-0.9.6c-2_i686-cmov.deb; 
> 
> according to Wichert's proposal (which I think will lead us to a support
> nightmare, not to mention the ugliness of the naming scheme)

No, for dependency-less optimizations you leave them out on purpose;
that's the whole idea. You want 32-bit applications that depend on
libssl0.9.6, to use either 
libssl0.9.6-0.9.6c-2_i386.deb or
libssl0.9.6-0.9.6c-2_i686.deb; completely transparent to the depending
application. I.e. every package becomes slightly virtual in the sense
that multiple architectures are allowed.

Only 64-bit applications would depend on lib64ssl0.9.6 (from
lib64ssl0.9.6-0.9.6c-2_x8664.deb, sorry, missed the 64 in my last mail)
instead of depending on libssl0.9.6, which is an entirely different
package. 

I'll stop rambling about this now though as optimization an entirely
different subject. I just wanted to second Wichert's idea.

Cheers,


Emile.

-- 
E-Advies - Emile van Bergen           emile@e-advies.nl      
tel. +31 (0)70 3906153           http://www.e-advies.nl    

Attachment: pgpYGBexh8vuJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: