>On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:42:58 -0600 >Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jean-Philippe MENGUAL wrote: > > 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 :) > > Never say never. It's my opinion that multilib, in general, is not > needed for LFS. Others may (probably do) disagree. > > > Last question (still short): do you think it's useful (and will be > > done) to build lfs from 32 to 64bits? > > Personally, no, I don't think it's useful in general. It is useful > in specialized applications like building for an embedded device that > doesn't have a compiler and other build support. However, I think > that is beyond the scope of LFS. > > -- Bruce >
Actually, there is one problem with a pure-64 bit system, as far as FOSS is conserned: GNU Emacs has not been ported to it (yet). Emacs can be built using a multilib, and works like a dream when it is. -AKuktin -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
