Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 20:19:58 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 6.x from i386 to amd64 Message-ID: <20061101091958.GD849@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20061031204446.GG28093@soaustin.net> References: <45475298.5090709@inoc.net> <nospam-1162325643.69866@iliad.gbch.net> <20061031153134.0f587f84.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> <20061031204446.GG28093@soaustin.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--IMjqdzrDRly81ofr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2006-Oct-31 14:44:46 -0600, Mark Linimon wrote: > - certain ports have i386 binaries (can't be fixed) > - certain ports have i386 asm code (can be fixed if there is fallback > C code) A partial solution to this is to get the i386 emulation and cross- building into better shape. If I really need a binary-only port then I can build/run it in emulation mode. This has bee discussed previously. IMHO, the FreeBSD/amd64 naming conventions make it much cleaner than (eg) Solaris and Linux as long as you only want native-mode apps. Unfortunately, it makes supporting i386 applications much harder (bacause they need to understand they need to look in .../lib32 ISO .../lib). --=20 Peter Jeremy --IMjqdzrDRly81ofr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFSGa+/opHv/APuIcRApbnAJ45MeDywaqhwqzTruCNH4Kt+IVrIQCeNJtj II/1Fry5QA4HwraZqOBQ6Nk= =05Rb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IMjqdzrDRly81ofr--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061101091958.GD849>