* Raul Miller | > Everyone knows that. If it was, we'd be doing it and sarge would be > | released in 2006 at best. That does NOT provide justification to not > | support AMD64 at *all*. | | The question is, what's the upgrade path to an amd64 system which supports | 32 bit code? Is that going to be easier from i386 than from amd64?
It will be the same (both path-wise and difficulty-wise). | First, you'd have to build a system which references /lib64 instead | of /lib, once you've upgraded to that system you could then get rid of | /lib and replace it with a 32 bit /lib/. Which means we'd be ready take | advantage of amd64 native support for i386 binaries sometime around 2010. | Maybe. Please, go read http://raw.no/debian/amd64-multiarch-3 and http://www.linuxbase.org/~taggart/multiarch.html . Multiarch does not require a full migration, it can be done piecewise (though, libc needs to be done first, for obvious reasons). | That's not a very exciting prospect to consider if the reason we're | trying to get amd64 in sarge is that not offering the support for the | architecture that other distributions do would make us a "laughingstock". I haven't seen anybody laugh at gentoo for not providing 32 bit AMD64 support. | I can guarantee you'd get more support for a 64/32 bit system than a | pure 64 bit system. [As in, I'd contribute.] I wouldn't. Not until you do it the right way, which is to do it multiarch. | > Right, so you'd be able to run AMD64 Debian and i386 Debian. What | > you're proposing is that we only offer i386 Debian. How is that better? | | Less complex upgrade path to AMD64 with 32 bit support. All libraries are going to move _no matter what_ for multiarch, they'll move to /{,usr}/lib/$arch-$os, so it won't matter. | And that's aside from problems like "ok, I've got my 64/32 | environment running X, and now I want to run a debian X app | inside a chroot cage." Then bind-mount /tmp and it will just work. | Last time I checked [two days ago], the trivial change to dpkg to support | amd64 hadn't happened. I think making sure that the debian package tools | work right for the architecture should be considered pre-requisites for | using the package system to present the rest of the packages. http://cvs.debian.org/dpkg/archtable.diff?r1=1.21.2.11&r2=1.21.2.12&only_with_tag=v1_10&cvsroot=dpkg Seems to have been applied about three weeks ago. -- Tollef Fog Heen ,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
