Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:47:59 +0100 From: Gary Jennejohn <garyj@jennejohn.org> To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] what to name linux 32-bit compat Message-ID: <200501172047.j0HKlxS7022766@peedub.jennejohn.org> In-Reply-To: Message from "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> <20050117203818.GA29131@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"David O'Brien" writes: > [ Respect the Reply-to:! ] > > /usr/ports Linux 32-bit compatibility on AMD64 is a mess and too rough > for what is expected of FreeBSD. Anyway... > > We need to decide how to have both Linux i686 and Linux amd64 compat > support live side-by-side. At the moment my leanings are for > /compat/linux32 and /compat/linux. We could also go with /compat/linux > and /compat/linux64 <- taking a page from the Linux LSB naming convention > (ie, they have lib and lib64). > > Linux 32-bit support is most interesting -- that is how we get Acrobat > reader and some other binary-only ports. The only Linux 64-bit things we > might want to run that truly matter 32-bit vs. 64-bit is Oracle and > IBM-DB2. For other applications 32-bit vs. 64-bit is mostly a "Just > Because Its There(tm)" thing. So making Linux 32-bit support the > cleanest looking from a /usr/ports POV has some merit. > > What do others think? > I agree with this 100%. Besides, at the moment the really interesting Linux applications for normal users, like realplayer, are only available in 32-bit mode, AFAIK. --- Gary Jennejohn / garyj[at]jennejohn.org gj[at]freebsd.org garyj[at]denx.de
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200501172047.j0HKlxS7022766>