On 05/24/05 02:29:16PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 01:32:54AM -0400, Jim Crilly wrote: > > > > > > > > Make the login environment be sparc32 by default. Doesn't that > > > > solve the problem? And for die-hard 64-bit people like me they > > > > can undo this via some configuration mechanism. > > > > > > > > It is one option. > > > > > > That's probably too ugly for some ppl. Then we'll have to answer the > > > question of "why does my sparc64 uname report sparc?". > > > > > > > I would be willing to bet that most people will never look and those that > > do will be competent enough to change whatever option is added to default > > them back to a 64-bit shell, as long as it's documented well. > > And what about building kernels? They will by default be building sparc32 > kernels. That's the most likely place for this to be a problem.
True, but building kernels on sparc64 wasn't terribly fun for me the last time I tried it either so I decided it wasn't worth it and just stuck with the Debian kernel images. I also would assume that Debian would only want to officially support building kernels with make-kpkg, so maybe some workarounds can be done in there? Jim. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
