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 1MEGqH-0002T2-Hk for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:59:21 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1E41EE044E; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:58:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34FAE044E for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:58:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D4965867 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:58:58 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.016 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.016 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.417, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 62TN4OkMeeTQ for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:58:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4E936587D for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:58:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1MEGpU-000254-IU for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:58:33 +0000 Received: from athedsl-386214.home.otenet.gr ([79.131.60.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:58:32 +0000 Received: from realnc by athedsl-386214.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:58:32 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Nikos Chantziaras Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: 64-bit kernel on a 32-bit installation Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:58:26 +0300 Organization: Lucas Barks Message-ID: References: <5bdc1c8b0906091644t5c6601ddn81f7944cacc049be@mail.gmail.com> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-386214.home.otenet.gr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090610 Thunderbird/3.0b2 In-Reply-To: <5bdc1c8b0906091644t5c6601ddn81f7944cacc049be@mail.gmail.com> Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: fa94414c-8706-45bb-abab-51b6b4720c68 X-Archives-Hash: 38d87008c29787f9d6d7758d0b5a5d63 On 06/10/2009 02:44 AM, Mark Knecht wrote: > Do others see value - getting 64-bit memory management, new CPU > flags, etc., but keeping the apps 32-bit for compatibility? Personally, no. I see more value in a true multilib Gentoo. Unfortunately, Gentoo's multilib is "fake". You can't build 32-bit libs and packages but have to download "emul" binary packages instead. It is by far better (IMO) being able to compile problematic packages as 32-bit instead of running a 32-bit userland in a 64-bit kernel.