From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Nn6s3-00069i-NO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2010 08:57:27 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 51537E0B2F; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 08:56:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpout.karoo.kcom.com (smtpout.karoo.kcom.com [212.50.160.34]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF83DE0B2F for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 08:56:46 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,579,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="178830449" Received: from unknown (HELO compaq.stroller.uk.eu.org) ([213.152.39.90]) by smtpout.karoo.kcom.com with ESMTP; 04 Mar 2010 08:56:45 +0000 Received: from funf.stroller.uk.eu.org (funf.stroller.uk.eu.org [192.168.1.71]) by compaq.stroller.uk.eu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4F4F3F1FF for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 08:56:43 +0000 (GMT) Message-Id: <3BB5376C-2909-484D-8780-F9E492754C19@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> From: Stroller To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Advice for 64-bit n00b? Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 08:56:34 +0000 References: <008DDC13-5883-4155-A996-64325EFCAA77@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> <201003032204.17232.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> <201003032251.10918.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <201003032356.12636.volkerarmin@googlemail.com> <87iq9cpovo.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) X-Archives-Salt: fe22c9a4-dcee-4673-bad9-6787f93eccc8 X-Archives-Hash: e92d977a8483ea6407be282ec6f92330 On 4 Mar 2010, at 07:19, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 03/04/2010 08:44 AM, Graham Murray wrote: >> Volker Armin Hemmann writes: >> >>> no, it is not safe to have a 64bit only system. Just choose the >>> multilib >>> profile and start installing. If something needs the 32bit emul >>> libs, it will >>> pull the stuff in. There is nothing you need to care about. >> >> What is unsafe about a 64bit only system? Surely if it were unsafe >> then >> Gentoo would not offer no-multilib profiles? I have recently built 2 >> systems using a no-multilib profile and have not found any >> problems, and >> expect to start building a third one today. > > You didn't understand the question Volker was replying to. The > question was not about "safe" as in "security", but rather "safe" as > in "I can rest assured that a no-multilib system can run every > software I could install", which is clearly not the case since some > applications need 32-bit support. I could imagine that web-browsers might need 32-bit support in order to play Flash, but can you suggest other applications which might? This is a headless server, and I was kinda reassured by Alan's response (Wed, 3 Mar 2010 22:04:17 +0200) [1] that seemed to assure me that a statically linked 32-bit binary would work fine if I selected the "no-multilib" profile. I'd be really quite happy if I knew that this decision was revocable - if I could choose "no-multilib" now and change my mind using eselect later. Presumably I can choose to keep these 32-bit libs for the moment & blow them away if I find I don't need them - this lib32 is, after all, in the stage3-amd64-*tar.bz2, so what is the point in offering me "no-multilib" if I can't do that? Stroller. [1] http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-user/msg_64a30b77742cf5846705952e6129367d.xml http://tinyurl.com/ykvx5co