From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 2 12:30:16 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC0E51065670 for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2009 12:30:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stapleton.41@gmail.com) Received: from mail-yw0-f191.google.com (mail-yw0-f191.google.com [209.85.211.191]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F25A8FC0C for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2009 12:30:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ywh29 with SMTP id 29so1143323ywh.33 for ; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 05:30:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=hsK3A0OpLbCJrKiirxaFeK5bQ9//GgR+jULYjnf6MJs=; b=oKOX2olQ70KwssTSxqNqvL1HNSQmcYtsITrlcyCVoEDLdc7yy5GrJOa92/zCp6j2sp RV4JpjrgIzKwqEUjFrgxywYgZMHqNwPNpZL32bqprsAHoJyWmSKrDSg3xwNh28KWlZ5R s83YvORBKuz8Fs9oK7KXjDMLF87q+NelRGykw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=kMrjc+1T/i9lrCEo/ZfPPCpxh2vsZN7u0pNAcNQ1it6aQVRPWRW3mBC9Tj3bMWp3x6 0zxOp5QXwOw0+I+w94zqYXC7R6nqiCU2YRKxIOq2gvC/A6ZYU/0Tk8sFitOZ2e26tWbL ItgNusq1j3f8yeHI4Wu0RmadAmZ9Ine8y/WWk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.61.3 with SMTP id j3mr13839872yba.76.1251894615746; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 05:30:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <80f4f2b20909010644j7962dc4cub71e725d083072ef@mail.gmail.com> <20090901155059.GA56945@slackbox.xs4all.nl> <80f4f2b20909010940u460a7b81r6372f48690ac1246@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 08:30:15 -0400 Message-ID: <80f4f2b20909020530w36ab8309k5595b5672e722579@mail.gmail.com> From: Jim To: "b. f." Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Roland Smith , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 32 bit ports on an AMD64 system X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:30:16 -0000 On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, b. f. wrote: > You've given some of your reasons for using amd64 -- but are your > reasons for using 32-bit binaries on amd64 strong enough to make all > of this worthwhile? Why not just use 64-bit binaries for all but the > 32-bit-only ports? Sure, some 32-bit applications will actually run > faster (the opposite is also often true) or use fewer resources, but > is it worth the hassle? Mostly that's what I want to do. However I'd like to do some Python QT development with PyQT4, and would like to test the performance using py-psycho (i386 bit only). In that situation, I'm not sure if I'll have to install QT4 as 32 bit or not, likewise for X... It's a bit messy, but we'll see what happens. Thanks for all the advice and help, -Jim Stapleton