On 06 May 2013, at 21:15, Andrew Brunner wrote: > On May 6, 2013, at 2:32 AM, Jonas Maebe <jonas.ma...@elis.ugent.be> wrote: > >> >> On 04 May 2013, at 16:24, Andrew Brunner wrote: >> >>> I agree that most of us first go to x64 downloads for binaries. Thinking >>> 32 to 64 or reverse is onerous on typical end users. >> >> The whole point is that the "typical end user" doesn't know nor should have >> to care about whether the compiler is a 32 or 64 bit binary. It should not >> make any difference whatsoever. If it does, then that's either a bug in FPC, >> or in Lazarus, its fpmake files or Makefiles (or fpcmake).
> I agree with what you are saying as long as the os matches the binary type. > An x64 native package must install a x64bit binary and utils. > > I would be understating if I said that a 32bit binary would be normal on a > 64bit distro. It does not matter in any way whatsoever on Windows (which is what the thread is about), where 32 and 64 bit binaries can always run transparently side by side on 64 bit versions of the OS without any need for the user to install special packages. On Mac OS X the situation is even more transparent because there even several systems that boot a 32 bit kernel can run 64 bit applications. In other words, there is no relation whatsoever between the "bitness" of the kernel and the "bitness" of the applications on Mac OS X. Jonas _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
