On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, b. f.bf1...@googlemail.com wrote:
You've given some of your reasons for using amd64 -- but are your
reasons for using 32-bit binaries on amd64 strong enough to make all
of this worthwhile? Why not just use 64-bit binaries for all but the
32-bit-only ports?
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
Also note that it is possible to have an i386 port-building jail on an
amd64 system.
So, make/build/run a normal jail using the 64 bit os world, add -m32
to the make.conf CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS, build stuff in the jail, and
copy it to main (non-jailed) system, and run ldconfig on the library
So, make/build/run a normal jail using the 64 bit os world, add -m32
to the make.conf CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS, build stuff in the jail, and
copy it to main (non-jailed) system, and run ldconfig on the library
directories? I'd probably also change PREFIX/LOCALBASE to prevent the
files from the ports
Well, this would certainly help with building the ports safely. But I
think we -- at least I was -- were thinking that you would actually
leave them in the jail, and run them from the jailed environment, so
there would be fewer run-time problems, and no work to transfer them
over. Remember
On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 09:44:10AM -0400, Jim wrote:
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
[...] but the ability to use extra memory *and* dynamically load
kernel modules is a bit more important to me.
All FreeBSD supported platforms can dynamically load native kernel modules, so
why should that be a factor in choosing between i386 and amd64?
Roland
I didn't specify just loading
On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 09:49:47AM -0400, Jim wrote:
Also note that it is possible to have an i386 port-building jail on an
amd64 system.
So, make/build/run a normal jail using the 64 bit os world, add -m32
to the make.conf CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS, build stuff in the jail, and
copy it to
You've given some of your reasons for using amd64 -- but are your
reasons for using 32-bit binaries on amd64 strong enough to make all
of this worthwhile? Why not just use 64-bit binaries for all but the
32-bit-only ports? Sure, some 32-bit applications will actually run
faster (the opposite is
On 9/1/09, b. f. bf1...@googlemail.com wrote:
. If you
don't use a jail ... well, I have not tried to install a large number
of 32-bit and 64-bit ports in parallel, so I am not sure if the
default setup for our loader will make the appropriate distinctions
between 32-bit and 64-bit versions
I want to compile some 32 bit ports on an AMD64 system. I know the GCC
has to receive the -m32 flag to compile the ports as 32 bit, but I
also want to change the install directory with 32 bit ports, I was
wondering which would be the most appropriate root given unix themes
and standard FreeBSD
I want to compile some 32 bit ports on an AMD64 system. I know the GCC
has to receive the -m32 flag to compile the ports as 32 bit, but I
also want to change the install directory with 32 bit ports, I was
wondering which would be the most appropriate root given unix themes
and standard FreeBSD
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 09:28:44AM -0400, Jim wrote:
I want to compile some 32 bit ports on an AMD64 system. I know the GCC
has to receive the -m32 flag to compile the ports as 32 bit, but I
also want to change the install directory with 32 bit ports, I was
wondering which would be the most
Roland Smith rsm...@xs4all.nl writes:
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 09:28:44AM -0400, Jim wrote:
I want to compile some 32 bit ports on an AMD64 system. I know the GCC
has to receive the -m32 flag to compile the ports as 32 bit, but I
also want to change the install directory with 32 bit ports, I
/usr/local/[same-as-before]-32 (i.e. [...]/bin32, [...]/lib32,
[...]/libexec32, etc)
The one above sounds most logical. The base system puts 32 bit libraries in
/usr/lib32.
It's too much trouble to append a 32 to every subdirectory of
/usr/local/ -- I'd still recommend something like
15 matches
Mail list logo
