>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> >> >You're right of course and lots of people use them. My point is that >> >Solaris has been 64 bits lon ger then most others. I think 64 bits in >> >AIX got 64 bits after Solaris and Linux (via Alpha) did. >> >Irix was 64 bit near the same time as Solaris but the end of the Irix >> >is visible. Did they port i t to anything other then MIPS? OSF1 or >> >Digital Unix or Tru64 on the Alpha was the 1st commercial 6 4 bit OS >> >but it's pretty much gone nowadays. I'm not sure where VMS or HP-UX >> >stand. >> >> IRIX was much earlier than Solaris; Solaris was pretty late in the 64 bit >> game with Solaris 7. > >And Alpha did not have a real 64 bit port as they did implement ILP64. >With ILP64 your application does not really notice that it runs in 64 bits >if you only use sizeof().
ILP64? AFAIK, Alpha had int as a 32 bit type and L and P as 64 bit types; even ILP64 would be a proper 64 bit OS if a tad difficult to port some code to. That's why time_t was a 32 bit value (oops). ILP64 is what HAL used in the shortlived Solaris64 OS and what Sun originally proposed for the SPARCv9 ABI; but DEC, starting from scratch, picked LP64 and when Sun finally got around to doing 64 bit the whole industry (meaning SGI and DEC) had decided an LP64 so we ditched ILP64 and went for LP64. (If I dig deep enough I can probably still find the "Why we are doing ILP64" and "Why we're doing LP64 afterall" papers someplace. The first one basically said "we think it'll make porting easier" and the second one was "we're following the industry".) Casper _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
