On Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 12:12:17AM -0400, Brian T. Schellenberger wrote:
-> John Aldrich wrote:
-> >
-> > On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, you wrote:
-> > > As to the zie of file, I heard about this formula: 2**n, n is the
-> > > bits of your OS. SO in our case (32 bits), it's about 2.1GB. I used
-> > > IRIX 64 bits system, I could creat 15GB single file.
-> > >
-> > IRIX is a 64-bit operating system, though, correct? Linux
-> > is still a 32-bit O/S (mostly, although there ARE 64-bit
-> > versions for things like the Sparc or the Alpha processor.)
-> > John
->
->
-> Actually, this is, generally speaking, more a matter of hardware than
-> O/S. Some O/Ss are not written to be able to handle both 32- and
-> 64-bit environments, but most are. Even Windows runs on the Alpha, and
-> has for some time, although I believe it takes less advantage of the
-> possiblities of the 64-bit processor than Linux does.
W9x does not run on the Alpha; it is Intel IA32 only. WNT does run on the
Alpha, but it is a straight 32 bit implementation. Of the 32GB available
on the Alpha that NT could possibly use, it runs the kernel in the top 2
GB (bit 31 set) and the user in the bottom 2 GB (bit 31 reset). Pointer
are 32 bit. Recent versions of VC++ have had support for 64 bit pointers,
but they are a separate data type and have had problems.
W2K is the same, but it also has a kludgy scheme for addressing some of
the rest of the memory, if you have more than 4 GB of physical RAM.
There is a port of NT to 64 bits in the works. I don't know what the
current schedule is, but my guess is that Linux will run on
Merced/Itanium/IA64 before NT does. I now doubt that there will ever be a
64 bit NT for Alpha. Much of the Alpha specific code, including compilers,
was written by DEC, later Compaq, not Microsoft. When Compaq pulled out of
NT Alpha development last fall, that killed off any further Alpha specific
development. If Microsoft has carried on on their own with Alpha
development since then, I am not aware of it.
The SDK does have a discussion on how to prepare your current 32 bit
Windows code for 64 bit. Reading that makes me think that the conversion
process will be a major kludge, with yet more idiotic data types, and will
still have the kind of problems Microsoft had when they were converting
from 16 to 32 bit code. Linux 32-64 bit conversion should be much cleaner.
->
-> So . . . Linux is a 32/64 bit operating system, but the Intel x86 chips
-> that the large majority of us run are 32-bit chips, so it's a 32-bit
-> environment there; if you buy yourself an Alpha, you can run Linux in a
-> 64-bit environment.
->
->
-> --
-> "Brian, the man from babble-on" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-> Brian T. Schellenberger http://www.babbleon.org
-> Support http://www.eff.org. Support decss defendents.
-> Support http://www.programming-freedom.org. Boycott amazon.com.
--
-- C^2
No windows were crashed in the making of this email.
Looking for fine software and/or web pages?
http://w3.trib.com/~ccurley
PGP signature
