[gentoo-user] About to embark on x32

[gentoo-user] About to embark on x32

[Michael Mol]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 330 bytes --]

So I'm about to try setting up the x32 arch in a VM. I notice there's no
handbook for it, though there is for amd64 and x86. I'm considering x32
for its lighter memory footprint...

Does anyone know of any notable differences between the setup process
for amd64 and x32, or should I expect things to be relatively smooth?


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 555 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: About to embark on x32

[Michael Mol]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 442 bytes --]

On 04/09/2013 09:46 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> So I'm about to try setting up the x32 arch in a VM. I notice there's no
> handbook for it, though there is for amd64 and x86. I'm considering x32
> for its lighter memory footprint...
> 
> Does anyone know of any notable differences between the setup process
> for amd64 and x32, or should I expect things to be relatively smooth?
> 

Well, scratch that. Segfault on the chroot step.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 555 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: About to embark on x32

[Alecks Gates]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 731 bytes --]

On Apr 9, 2013 9:16 PM, "Michael Mol" <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 04/09/2013 09:46 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> > So I'm about to try setting up the x32 arch in a VM. I notice there's no
> > handbook for it, though there is for amd64 and x86. I'm considering x32
> > for its lighter memory footprint...
> >
> > Does anyone know of any notable differences between the setup process
> > for amd64 and x32, or should I expect things to be relatively smooth?
> >
>
> Well, scratch that. Segfault on the chroot step.
>
Yeah, the differences are not very huge setup-wise from, what i could tell,
but the compiler definitely isn't all there.  The time i did try it i found
a few compiler issues and life caught up with me very quickly.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 934 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] About to embark on x32

[Hinnerk van Bruinehsen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 786 bytes --]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 09:46:33PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote:
> So I'm about to try setting up the x32 arch in a VM. I notice there's no
> handbook for it, though there is for amd64 and x86. I'm considering x32
> for its lighter memory footprint...
> 
> Does anyone know of any notable differences between the setup process
> for amd64 and x32, or should I expect things to be relatively smooth?
> 

I think that there are some problems with packages that rely on assembly
code (as there would have x32 specific assembly) so you get either
unoptimised binarys (if assembly is just for performance reasons) or
compilation will fail at all.
That was the reasoning why it's ten years too late (back then the same
problem existed with x86_64 - the asm needed to be ported).


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] About to embark on x32

[Walter Dnes]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 09:46:33PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote
> ...I'm considering x32 for its lighter memory footprint...

  For server use, I assume that it'll be a textmode-console-only system.
There are probably better ways to lighten the memory footprint than x32.
I started off with the "default/linux/x86/13.0" profile, but even that
was pulling in stuff I didn't want... *ON MY DESKTOP MACHINE*.  After
some trial and error, I found that beginning my USE variable with "-*",
and adding necessary stuff in package.use, is less work than editing
package.use and make.conf without "-*".  The whole point of this
excercise is to have fewer unnecessary libs loaded.

  Other memory-saving stuff includes switching over to uclibc (assumes
you have no proprietary binaries) and mdev and busybox.  Add
"-fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables" to CFLAGS for more
memory savings.  See the short thread at...
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.busybox/36695 The busybox people
are absolutely anal about saving memory.  You can't go wrong following
their example.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications