On 05/12/13 07:06 PM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > We're going to have to support a 32-bit userland for some time to come, > unfortunately, but we should no longer make that the default, and we should > deliver all of our system utilities in 64-bit only form, IMO; and we could > entirely kill off the 32-bit kernel. > > Alternatively, if there is sufficient demand, one could imagine a separate > architecture for ia32, that is the 32-bit variant port. That would not need > to carry the 64-bit support. Admittedly going this route reduces the > likelihood of keeping certain bits capable of running 32-bit mode (e.g. > device drivers), but one would argue that 32 bit systems are unlikely to > adapt new devices, etc. precisely because they are *so* friggin' old. > Not only x86. There is also SPARC with it's 32-bit apps to count for. (I don't use 32-bit but on Eeepc) As I understand 32-bit SPARC apps run faster then 64 , unlike on x86 where amd64 apps are faster. And what about if Illumos starts running/being ported on ARM (64Bit) and have need of supporting KVMs with tons of 32-bit ARM applications? Will it also work if 32-bit is ditched right now? I don't expect 32-bit applications/userland to stop being important so soon.
If multiarch "bitness" priciple is ditched from building Illumos , that would ditch one thing that is present only on Illumos until now and not elsewhere. I guess there is still no 128-bit CPUs? Will multiarch need to be reinvented when they arrive? _______________________________________________ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
