> First, I hope that you have a good reason for doing this, because it > is going to be a PITA, and prone to all sorts of problems. [...]
Unfortunately I do. The 32 bit stuff is *would be really nice, but not necessary*, but the ability to use extra memory *and* dynamically load kernel modules is a bit more important to me. > If you are just talking about unshadowed ports, you could try adding > something like the following to /etc/make.conf: > > .ifdef(32BIT) > PREFIX=/usr/local/32 > LOCALBASE=/usr/local/32 > LDCONFIG=/sbin/ldconfig -32 > CFLAGS+=-m32 > .endif > > and then wrapping your portupgrade, portmaster, or make commands with: > > env 32BIT=yes [insert rest of command here] > > If there is shadowing, you have to consider how to manage the > environment PATH so that you can actually run the 32-bit binary > executables without typing in fully-qualified pathnames every time, > and maybe also using LD_RUN_PATH or LD_LIBRARY_PATH so that the right > libraries are used --- you can see how problems crop up at every turn? I was thinking of leaving the standard paths alone, and setting up one or more [ba|c|]sh32 alias/scripts which would start up the appropriate shell, with 32-bit directories at the front of the path. I know I'll end up having both 32- and 64-bit of Python on my system (many of the main apps I use require python - but I also want to be able to use py-psyco), as well as a few copies of the various GUI toolkits in 32-bit. Thanks for the info, -Jim Stapleton -Jim Stapleton _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"