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 1Nn5Mc-0007NI-Cc for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2010 07:20:54 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6F0F0E0C81; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 07:20:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F5F5E0C81 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 07:20:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7BF81B400A for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 07:20:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.026 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.026 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.427, 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 nvGBBhdiibjS for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 07:20:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 325941B4033 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 07:20:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nn5Lj-00087M-59 for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2010 08:19:59 +0100 Received: from athedsl-386957.home.otenet.gr ([79.131.63.139]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 04 Mar 2010 08:19:59 +0100 Received: from realnc by athedsl-386957.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 04 Mar 2010 08:19:59 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Nikos Chantziaras Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Advice for 64-bit n00b? Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 09:19:57 +0200 Organization: Lucas Barks Message-ID: 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> 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=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-386957.home.otenet.gr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100206 Thunderbird/3.0.1 In-Reply-To: <87iq9cpovo.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk> X-Archives-Salt: af5e5a29-7dcc-4e24-aad8-dabc947dbde5 X-Archives-Hash: 5c3a4e0590ac174b76f9dafc2c76e3b7 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.