[gentoo-user] Re: 64-bit kernel on a 32-bit installation
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mark Knecht wrote: Hi, I lurk on the LKML, say hi once in awhile, ask a question once in awhile, and try to read at least the interesting to a non-programmer posts. I was curious about this one that came up today. Seems like this is a natural for Gentoo. I have a Gentoo 64-bit setup but have had lots of troubles over the years (far less now though) with web media and other things that need to be more Windows compatible. (I do audio work with my Gentoo boxes - interface to studios and a few bands, etc) I've found that my 32-bit Gentoo installations have been more compatible than 64-bit. Outside stuff like Java is better. In general when I have a problem I wonder if it's because I'm running 64-bit. How would one go about building a 64-bit kernel on a 32-bit machine with Gentoo? I presume that's mostly just how I configure the kernel, along with maybe some cross-compile options? Are there any projects going on in this area where I might become a test case? Wiki? Docs? Do others see value - getting 64-bit memory management, new CPU flags, etc., but keeping the apps 32-bit for compatibility? Take care, Mark Personally, I am using a 64-bit kernel with a 32-bit userland. My setup is a bit more complicated than the usual, because I have a x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc that will build 32-bit as well as 64-bit binaries. The simpler version of what I use is: # emerge crossdev # crossdev -t x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Then, you can use something like the following to actually build a 64-bit kernel (personally, I always use out-of-tree builds, and create a GNUmakefile that calls the Makefile in the current directory with all the options I want): (in the kernel build directory) # make -C /path/to/sources O=`pwd` ARCH=x86 \ CROSS_COMPILE=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu- \ menuconfig I have found that just about everything works perfectly in my 64-bit kernel with 32-bit userland, *except* VirtualBox, which I have to run the 64-bit version of from a chroot. I also personally handle all external kernel modules, and add them to package.provided when necessary, so portage doesn't have to think about them. PS: I was going to outline all the patches, etc. that I needed for a multilib gcc/glibc, but then realized that you probably didn't need that much detail. - -- ABCD -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkovRjcACgkQOypDUo0oQOrMdgCfXRiLDyg1IH8d9fA+WodUjWO8 PRMAnihXrPy3VZBYhRF7LzWVivKl2eIb =dD3A -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-user] Re: 64-bit kernel on a 32-bit installation
On 06/10/2009 02:44 AM, Mark Knecht wrote: Do others see value - getting 64-bit memory management, new CPU flags, etc., but keeping the apps 32-bit for compatibility? Personally, no. I see more value in a true multilib Gentoo. Unfortunately, Gentoo's multilib is fake. You can't build 32-bit libs and packages but have to download emul binary packages instead. It is by far better (IMO) being able to compile problematic packages as 32-bit instead of running a 32-bit userland in a 64-bit kernel.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: 64 bit or not
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 08:00:24 +0100 Ralph Slooten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Harry Putnam wrote: The amd64 faq link posted by Ralph Sooten tells a kind of bleak story as of June 2005 about there being nothing remarkable about 64 performance and futher that 32 bit out performs in many areas. It is also said that for `desktop' use there isn't much point. Somewhere in that FAQ there was a link to the gentoo forum (thread) where I read users were/are having the exact opposite results. They were getting much better results with the 64-bit. I think at the end this becomes one big debate, just like comparing AMD MHz and Intel MHz. My reasoning on whether to compile in a 64-bit environment, or a 32 is quite simple: if you don't want to hasle (which so far has not been as emerge sorts out everything it seems for you) of sometimes letting gentoo do tricks for you to run 32 bit programs with a second set of 32-bit libs etc, then just stick with 32 all the way. If you want to be stubborn (like me) and use your computer like it's supposed to be, and with a scense of adventure, use 64-bit. At the end of the day I can say hey guys, I'm running a 64-bit OS ;-) My notebook (HP zd8000) has the P4 with 64 bit extensions or emulation or whatever it is called. I am curious about the 64 bit OS's, but really have no idea whether there is any advantage whatsever except for the experience of using such a system. I do however, use Complex-128 variables in Numeric Python. But since my cpu is under some sort of emulation, I don't know if anything would run faster. Maybe I just have to try it to find out. Rob. -- -- http://home.comcast.net/~europa100 A SETI-like Search for Intelligent Life in Central Pa. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: 64 bit or not
surely this would not be slower maybe equal to actually or faster ^^ On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 07:04:25AM -0800, Rob Lytle wrote: On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 08:00:24 +0100 Ralph Slooten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Harry Putnam wrote: The amd64 faq link posted by Ralph Sooten tells a kind of bleak story as of June 2005 about there being nothing remarkable about 64 performance and futher that 32 bit out performs in many areas. It is also said that for `desktop' use there isn't much point. Somewhere in that FAQ there was a link to the gentoo forum (thread) where I read users were/are having the exact opposite results. They were getting much better results with the 64-bit. I think at the end this becomes one big debate, just like comparing AMD MHz and Intel MHz. My reasoning on whether to compile in a 64-bit environment, or a 32 is quite simple: if you don't want to hasle (which so far has not been as emerge sorts out everything it seems for you) of sometimes letting gentoo do tricks for you to run 32 bit programs with a second set of 32-bit libs etc, then just stick with 32 all the way. If you want to be stubborn (like me) and use your computer like it's supposed to be, and with a scense of adventure, use 64-bit. At the end of the day I can say hey guys, I'm running a 64-bit OS ;-) My notebook (HP zd8000) has the P4 with 64 bit extensions or emulation or whatever it is called. I am curious about the 64 bit OS's, but really have no idea whether there is any advantage whatsever except for the experience of using such a system. I do however, use Complex-128 variables in Numeric Python. But since my cpu is under some sort of emulation, I don't know if anything would run faster. Maybe I just have to try it to find out. Rob. -- -- http://home.comcast.net/~europa100 A SETI-like Search for Intelligent Life in Central Pa. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: 64 bit or not
Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] For the most part, the Free, Libre, and Open Source Software (FLOSS) side, certainly for the commonly used stuff, has long ago been ported, and will present little or no issues related to 64-bit. [...] Snipped lots of good info Condensing that all down to a simple summary, most stuff you will run is available in 64-bit, no problem. The problems, with the exception of OOo, are mainly confined to 32-bit-only proprietaryware, but even then, 32-bit runs quite well on the amd64 arch. Setting up dual 32 and 64-bit support is a bit more complex than 32-bit only, but there's the usual level of good Gentoo documentation and help available when it's necessary, so most run it with very little more difficulty than they'd have running 32-bit x86 Gentoo. Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 08:30:10 -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: I'm about to install gentoo on an athlon64. Is there enough 64 bit software and other good reasons to use the 64 bit version? Almost everything has 64 bit versions, and those that don't, you can run as 32 bit. The main problem is proprietary plugins, so use firefox-bin to get the 32 bit compiled version, then you can install the plugins. 32 bit plugins won't work with a Firefox compiled for 64 bit. The amd64 faq link posted by Ralph Sooten tells a kind of bleak story as of June 2005 about there being nothing remarkable about 64 performance and futher that 32 bit out performs in many areas. It is also said that for `desktop' use there isn't much point. R Slootens link: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-amd64-faq.xml Leads here: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-amd64-faq.xml#perfup Which leads here: http://enterprise.linux.com/enterprise/05/06/09/1413209.shtml?tid=121 Do you guys agree with that assessment? -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: 64 bit or not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Harry Putnam wrote: The amd64 faq link posted by Ralph Sooten tells a kind of bleak story as of June 2005 about there being nothing remarkable about 64 performance and futher that 32 bit out performs in many areas. It is also said that for `desktop' use there isn't much point. Somewhere in that FAQ there was a link to the gentoo forum (thread) where I read users were/are having the exact opposite results. They were getting much better results with the 64-bit. I think at the end this becomes one big debate, just like comparing AMD MHz and Intel MHz. My reasoning on whether to compile in a 64-bit environment, or a 32 is quite simple: if you don't want to hasle (which so far has not been as emerge sorts out everything it seems for you) of sometimes letting gentoo do tricks for you to run 32 bit programs with a second set of 32-bit libs etc, then just stick with 32 all the way. If you want to be stubborn (like me) and use your computer like it's supposed to be, and with a scense of adventure, use 64-bit. At the end of the day I can say hey guys, I'm running a 64-bit OS ;-) R Slootens link: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-amd64-faq.xml Leads here: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-amd64-faq.xml#perfup Which leads here: http://enterprise.linux.com/enterprise/05/06/09/1413209.shtml?tid=121 Do you guys agree with that assessment? The last link has a few comments at the bottom, the last one being: This benchmark is close to useless as described by the other posters. If anything it goes to show how well Athlon64 copes with non-optimized code. This is pretty much what the users said on the gentoo forum too iirc. Well, to fill you in on my progress I have now almost finished compiling my new system with 64-bit, with the exception of mozilla-firefox-bin and openoffice-bin (32-bit). I haven't had any problems yet. The computer is surprisingly fast with compiling although I cannot compare it to 32-bit code on the same machine, so this isn't a comparison, just a remark. I tested the NVidia drivers (64-bit version) last night ... no problems at all either. I think in general the only snatch with 64-bit is that closed-source software not providing 64-bit binaries will have to be run using 32-bit libs. This being said, more and more are and will be in the future, with the exception of companies like macromedia who just blatently refuse to release any 64-bit software, limiting all it's users to using a 32-bit browser just to be able to use the flash plugin. Greetings Ralph -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDl9oHCt0ZF9kLPvYRAkdnAKCgAa+t+edhKvUA6yDyMmaFH8xU/ACfWieg cr/0G2xsBWHansB+W8jiAeo= =Ka8y -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
