Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Do any of you still have a 32-bit Intel system that you use to
> test/run LFS?
I am not sure whether this is directly relevant to your question - but
here is my story anyway.
I switched to LFS (on an AMD k6/k7) in the version 4.x days, when
32-bit was the default and going 64-bit was rather daring since not
all applications (particularly multimedia ones) would reliably work on
64-bit. Since then I have simply used each old LFS version to host
the next one, so I am still in 32-bit mode even though the CPUs have
been 64-bit for years now. (I have remained faithful to AMD CPUs
because loyalty/masochism/whatever.)
$ uname -a
Linux omphalos 4.8.14-0 #1 SMP PREEMPT Sat Dec 10 20:51:14 GMT 2016 i686
GNU/Linux
$ grep '^\(processor\|vendor_id\|model name\)' /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
model name : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4000+
processor : 1
vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
model name : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4000+
So I am still running LFS on 32-bit (in some sense). As for testing,
my two current installations are LFS-6.8 and LFS-7.3, but I keep both
up to date with the latest BLFS-devel packages (except for special
circumstances - which usually means packages that require a newer
gcc). If that counts as testing BLFS, then, yes, I test BLFS on
32-bit.
I would like to go 64-bit sometime, but things work well enough at the
moment and there always seems to be something more urgent to do first.
Hope this is helpful, sorry if it is not.
Regards,
Jeremy Henty
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
