----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Dubbs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "LFS Developers Mailinglist" <lfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org> Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 7:01 AM Subject: Re: The value of 64-bit vs 32-bit
... > > * Any comments on the details provided in the above article, > > specifically in how that might relate to LFS? > > The issue is compatibility vs speed. The speed improvements are not > significant for most applications. It's true that if you are going to > memory map a very large file, as in editing a movie, then the > increased address space would be quite useful. Other areas are when > physical ram exceeds 4G or very high accuracy calculations (e.g. > solving systems of differential equations) are needed, the increased > address space and register size is needed. > Users ask for more memory to be supported. We have to prepare for that, even on ipcop. ... > > Compatibility of older hardware is also an issue. Many of the older > hardware drivers may have issues when trying to run in 64-bit mode. > I've heard of a lot of problems with things like wifi drivers in some > commercial 64 bit distros. > Compatibility with new hardware is an issue too that surface now (gmp ABI=32 for example, m4-1.4.10 has segfaulted on x86_64 hardware during configure) How do you actually compile LFS-6.4 when your base distrib is a 64b distrib? Don't you have a note on Host system requirements that state the base software has to be 32b or use CLFS? Gilles -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
