ok thanks for this answer. I'll remember that 32-32 64-64, it will be
easier for me to solve some problems.
For multilib, I understand it'll be never done lfs. ok. I'm pleased with
knowing precisely this. It will help me to see my translation strategy
among complex lfs world :)
Last question (still short): do you think it's useful (and will be done)
to build lfs from 32 to 64bits?
Regards,
-
Jean-Philippe MENGUAL
Vice-Président de l'association traduc.org
Coordinateur du projet Linux From Scratch
Le dimanche 24 janvier 2010 à 18:59 -0600, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> Jean-Philippe MENGUAL wrote:
>
> > Just a precision because, beyond translating, I manage a French help
> > network too. Can you tell me, and I think it could be precised in the
> > book or on the website, what kind of buildings can do a user exactly
> > with this stable (6.6)? From 64 to 64 bits? From 32 to 32? Or 32 to
> > 64? If I read architecture.xml, I see that, originally we build a 32
> > bits, but a 64 is possible. Only a 64bits host is required for that?
> > If yes, can we do a 32bits with a 64bits host?
>
> I don't see a need to change what we do now: 32->32 and 64->64.
>
> It's really the same way we did it when transitioning from Linux 2.4 to
> Linux-2.6 where we required somebody else's Linux-2.6 to build the first
> LFS with a 2.6 kernel.
>
> > To finish, I guess no multilib is still supported.
>
> Short answer, no.
>
> The only reason I can think of to have a multilib system is to be able
> to run proprietary binaries that don't support 64-bit systems. What
> applications do you have that fit that category?
>
> To me, multilib is twice the work for very little benefit.
>
> -- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
