jmengual at linuxfromscratch.org
Sat Jul 18 13:13:59 PDT 2009
Strange, I was sure that with LFS-SVN, it was now possible to have a
64bits system, with the new build method of the toolchain. It was a big
opposition point with some clfs team's members: 2 methods to get the
same result (a 64bits system). But maybe I had not understood.
Anyway right it would be a good thing LFS to build a 64bits system for
its popularity and its future. Maybe for 7.4 release...
Vice-Président de l'association traduc.org
Coordinateur du projet Linux From Scratch
Le samedi 18 juillet 2009 à 15:11 -0500, Randy McMurchy a écrit :
> Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/18/09 14:58 CST:
> > Randy McMurchy wrote:
> >> Isn't a 32bit platform becoming almost obsolete anyway?
> > What applications or hardware do you have that require more than 32 bits?
> That is not what I was driving at. Can you even go out and buy a 32bit
> Intel/AMD machine right now? I doubt it.
> So our client base is folks who have old hardware sitting around, or
> have old hardware and want to keep using it. It's going to fail sooner
> or later, though. I know, I have been building PC's (and supporting
> vendor supplied ones) for coming up 20 years. I am speaking from
> I know you are in the minority that would use a 64-bit machine with a
> 32-bit operating system, because you think there is no benefit using
> 64-bit OS. But not many folks look at it like that.
> My point was that I feel there is going to be less and less client
> base LFS will cater to as the days pass. Now, does that make my
> position a bit clearer?
> rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.25] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
> [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 18.104.22.168 i686]
> 15:06:00 up 12 days, 3:34, 1 user, load average: 0.21, 0.39, 0.22
More information about the blfs-dev