On 15 December 2015 at 18:41, Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> wrote: > Richard Melville wrote: >> >> On 15 December 2015 at 08:36, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> 15. Dec 2015 01:18 by [email protected]: >>> >>> I'm beginning to think maybe my new direction ought to be an x86-64 >>> Multilib, as I have a few Core2 boxes and one i7. I have some strategic >>> questions though. >>> >>> I understand that some programs have "issues" with 64-bit systems. How >>> common is this? How does one know how to plan for the "BLFS" stage? >>> After an x86-64 system is created, and would be the host for future >>> development, then what? Presumably the next system doesn't need to be >>> cross-compiled. Can one use the regular LFS book? I just want to know >>> what it "means" to make the shift. >>> -- >>> Paul Rogers >>> [email protected] >>> Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates." >>> (I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL >>> :-) >>> >>> Since the last few years I've never used a 32 bit system and so far there >>> have been no issues at all with a 64 bit system. However, I've not >>> compiled >>> a 32 bit system on a 64 bit host so you might run into some trouble if >>> you >>> plan on doing that. >>> >>> >>> There have been some problems with a 64 bit only system but most of these >>> are obsolete since a few years. There were problems with 32 bit >>> proprietary >>> flash versions and if you want to use Wine you need some 32 bit >>> libraries. >> >> >> >> I would just add that running a 64 bit system on a low spec machine >> slows it down further. Experience has shown me that, in particular, >> the amount of RAM installed is very important. Other than that I've >> encountered no other problems with a pore 64 bit install. > > > What do you consider a low spec system? I have built LFS on a system with > 1G of RAM several times. You just need some swap to handle a couple of > large packages (gcc/glibc). CPU speed should not be a consideration. > > -- Bruce
As this is the BLFS Support List, that's what I was considering rather than an LFS build; and not so much building as running a completed system. I don't have any figures to hand, but as an example: on an old laptop with 2GB of DDR2 RAM and a dual core Celeron processor, running a 64 bit system, at times, almost brought it to a halt, but a 32 bit system (I had it dual-booted) could still be slow but was much faster than the equivalent 64 bit system. Adding a further 2GB of RAM improved matters considerably. Of course, as there are so many other variables to take into account I'm not suggesting this to be a definitive study, although I think that it does indicate that a 64 bit system requires more horse power. Richard -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
