On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 11:04:32PM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
> While it's always unfortunate and undesirable to have bugs in releases
> or have missing features, it's even more undesirable to hold releases
> indefinitely until "all the problems are solved".
Even the most cursory review of GNATS wil
workaround i use: 32-bit jail on amd64 system ... not so bad ...
2006/5/2, Mikhail Teterin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Tuesday 02 May 2006 05:59, Peter Jeremy wrote:
= But probably not as fast since it's using a generic 'C' core instead
= of a hand-tweaked assembler core. I read Mikhail's comment a
On Tuesday 02 May 2006 05:59, Peter Jeremy wrote:
= But probably not as fast since it's using a generic 'C' core instead
= of a hand-tweaked assembler core. I read Mikhail's comment as meaning
= that it is possible to build non-trivial 32-bit executables on amd64,
= there's just work still needed
On Tuesday 02 May 2006 02:22, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
= cc can build binaries just fine if you also use the -B option:
=
= % cc -m32 -B/usr/lib32 ...
Yes, this is a work-around. It is not a solution... /usr/lib32 should be there
automatically.
= I know it does because I've used it on m
On Tue, 2006-May-02 00:04:14 +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
>On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 05:39:02PM -0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
...
>> create 32-bit executables. Thus created lame, for example (from the
>> audio/lame port) works and happily converts mp3 files (using
>> assembler-optimized routines availa
> I tend to get snippy towards the end of release cycles, and I apologize
> to those I've offended or have been needlessly rude to. But please hear
> me out on what I have to say here
>
...
> The release process is about balancing the need to "get it done" with
> the need to "get it as good
On 2006-05-01 16:04, Mikhail Teterin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can I direct someone's attention to the annoying but easy to fix bug:
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=gnu/96570
>
> There are still a few days left to make sure, FreeBSD-6.1 is shipped with
> amd64 being able to
I tend to get snippy towards the end of release cycles, and I apologize
to those I've offended or have been needlessly rude to. But please hear
me out on what I have to say here
What makes a release cycle stressful is not the bug tracking and fixing,
or the building of bits, or anything lik
Paul Allen wrote:
This was originally mentioned in amd64/76224 which was closed by obrien with the
terse remark: "We don't yet support building 32-bit apps on a 64-bit system. We
only barely support *running* them at this point."
Really this deserves an errata mention at the very least. It just
понеділок 01 травень 2006 19:25, Sean Bryant написав:
> > The gcc's multilib.h functionality is just for that. [...]
> Then why not work on adding the functionality? I'm sure freebsd people
> would love to have a proper working 32 bit compatibility layer
> happening.
Did you see the PR -- with th
Then why not work on adding the functionality? I'm sure freebsd people
would love to have a proper working 32 bit compatibility layer
happening.
On 5/1/06, Mikhail Teterin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
понеділок 01 травень 2006 18:55, Jonathan Noack написав:
> Did you miss the previous reply which m
понеділок 01 травень 2006 18:55, Jonathan Noack написав:
> Did you miss the previous reply which mentioned using '-B/usr/lib32
> -B/usr/local/lib32' in addition to '-m32'?
I did not miss this work-around. But it is not a proper way -- one need not
specify -B/usr/lib in the 64-bit case. Nor should
Mikhail Teterin wrote:
понеділок 01 травень 2006 17:25, Paul Allen написав:
This was originally mentioned in amd64/76224 which was closed by obrien
with the terse remark: "We don't yet support building 32-bit apps on a
64-bit system. We only barely support *running* them at this point."
I may
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 05:39:02PM -0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> I may be missing something huge, but, it seems to me, that my little
> patch is sufficient to point cc to the right direction. With it I can
> create 32-bit executables. Thus created lame, for example (from the
> audio/lame port)
понеділок 01 травень 2006 17:25, Paul Allen написав:
> This was originally mentioned in amd64/76224 which was closed by obrien
> with the terse remark: "We don't yet support building 32-bit apps on a
> 64-bit system. We only barely support *running* them at this point."
I may be missing something
This was originally mentioned in amd64/76224 which was closed by obrien with the
terse remark: "We don't yet support building 32-bit apps on a 64-bit system. We
only barely support *running* them at this point."
Really this deserves an errata mention at the very least. It just simply
isn't intuit
Sorry incase any of you else are interested. Read Below.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Sean Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: May 1, 2006 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: cc can't build 32-bit executables on amd64
To: Mikhail Teterin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
add the flag -B/usr
Can I direct someone's attention to the annoying but easy to fix bug:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=gnu/96570
There are still a few days left to make sure, FreeBSD-6.1 is shipped with
amd64 being able to link 32-bit executables.
Release Engineers insist, it must be fixed in
18 matches
Mail list logo
