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

Re: Building i386 binaries on ia64.

On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 01:21:06PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Rob Andrews <rob@choralone.org> writes:
> > On 14-Apr-2007 16:14.22 (BST), Al Stone wrote:
> >  > I personally have no idea why there are ia32-libs on ia64.  The
> >  > only possible reasons I can think of are: (1) older versions of
> >  > the processor did have a small x86 processor on chip so it could
> >  > execute x86 binaries, or (2) it allows one to use the Intel ia32el
> >  > layer (a software layer to emulate x86 on ia64, but unfortunately
> >  > proprietary code).
> >
> > I don't think ia32el is in Debian (nothing in pool/i/ for contrib or
> > non-free).

It should be able to be in non-free if someone would be willing to
package it.  From Intel's download page:  "Most current versions of
Linux* operating systems for Itanium architecture include IA-32 EL.
Please refer to vendor documentation to determine if IA-32 EL is
included in the version that you are using and if any actions are
required to turn on IA-32 EL."  Haven't actually read the license,

> > The wikipedia article on ia64 sheds a little light, and indicates that point
> > 1 is probably correct (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ia64#IA-32_support):
> >
> >   "The original IA-64 architecture included support for IA-32 instructions
> >   and could therefore run the many thousands of applications available for
> >   x86-based systems. This can eliminate the added expense and complexity of
> >   deploying a second server or porting code from IA-32 to IA-64. However,
> >   performance was slower than for native IA-64 code and about 50% slower
> >   than for the same IA-32 code running on x86 servers of the time."
> >
> > It goes on to say that it was removed starting with Montecito in July 2006,
> > and replaced with emulation instead.

...and that emulation is free-as-in-beer at Intel's site, and is faster
than the ia32 on ia64 hardware ever was.

> > I'm giving up on the thought of building i386 binaries on ia64 in that case!

There's also a command to get uname to report the desired arch (needed
for building some things, like a kernel), but I can't recall it now.

Personally, I've replaced ia32-libs with a chroot setup because I needed
a lib or two not in the package; maintaining my own ia32-libs isn't as
easy as maintaining a chroot.  The chroot is only chroot'ed into for
installation and upgrades; everything else just works on PATH and

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: