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

Re: ppc64 port

Albert Cahalan wrote:

On Wed, 2004-04-28 at 09:13, Tom Gall wrote:
The design choice is what is the "default" mode. IE if a user just calls gcc, are they going to get a 64 bit app, or a 32 bit app. Install something like apache, will it be 64 bit or 32 bit... etc etc.

1) SuSE SLES 8 for PowerPC64 - Default is 32 bit

That may be, but they did manage to compile a number
of packages as 64-bit. This isn't another case of
slapping a 64-bit kernel and libc on a 32-bit install
and calling it good.
Yes exactly... but on the other hand it's not a full 64 bit environment either. Clearly it's something to get one started and be somewhat useful.

If you really want a 32-bit userspace, remember
that you can simply run a 32-bit distribution.

2) SuSE SLES 8 for x86_64 - Default is 64 bit
4) Gentoo/ppc64 - Default is 64 bit

Well, that looks like the thing to run on a Mac G5.
Gentoo is planning ahead and keeping things simple.

Alternately, run a pure 32-bit system. Why not?
Let's not complicate things for no good reason.
Again, exactly.

Given that one can very easily do something like

install 64 bit default distro x to /dev/sda2
install 32 bit default distro x to /dev/sda3

boot kernel with root=/dev/sda2

mount /dev/sda3 /mnt/32bitenv
cd /mnt/32bitenv
mount -o bind /dev ./dev
mount -o bind /proc ./proc
mount -o bind /tmp ./tmp
chroot . /bin/bash (or whatever)

and there ya go, 32 bit env that can even run x apps displayed on a 64 bit x windows. Just works. It's not complicated, one doesn't have to battle AT ALL any of the package issues or worry about a 64 bit package installing over a 32 bit package etc etc etc.

The whole jam a 32 bit env and a 64 bit env into the same file system seems wrought with problems. It can be done yes... but the cost in complexity seems far too high.


Reply to: