* Julian Mehnle (lists@mehnle.net) wrote: > The reason why we did not want to create a completely separate arch for > amd64 was that every self-contained arch consumes huge quantities of space > since almost all arch-dependant binary packages have to be duplicated for > the arch. But in the case of amd64 (and some other archs), many packages > can be reused from legacy archs without significant performance penalties, > so only few packages (where it makes sense performance-wise) would need to > be recompiled for amd64. Personally, I disagree that this is really such a bad thing. I, for one, would really rather have everything recompiled for amd64. The disk space used really *isn't* all that bad, and I don't think we should be driven by disk space usage regardless. For amd64, at least, alot of the packages will benefit from the additional registeres and ability to address more memory. Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature