grub port question
Henrik W Lund
henrik.w.lund at broadpark.no
Thu Sep 30 12:31:36 PDT 2004
Peter Wemm wrote:
>On Thursday 30 September 2004 10:03 am, Rob wrote:
>>I was going to try to use grub for booting from my multidisk system,
>>as I was told that the bootup process is done in i386, then it is
>>transfered to 64 bit mode. So grub works OK. But last nite I tried
>>to install grub from ports and got the message immediately
>>(paraphrasing) "that I could not compile a 32 bit application on a 64
>>So now I'm really confused LOL.
>In a nutshell, the toolchain has various flags/switches to control its
>operating mode. For example, gcc has -m32 and -m64. The catch is that
>we do not install the 32 bit version of the include files yet. And you
>have to use tools/lib32/build32.sh to build the 32 bit libraries. The
>rest of the toolchain has various mode switches. eg: as --32 etc. gcc
>could be slightly tweaked to use the correct include and library paths,
>but for now it needs horrible -I and -L switches.
>However, the port problem is that it doesn't know any of these magic
>options. I hate to say it, but the easiest thing is probably to just
>fetch the i386 package for now. If pkg_add won't do it, then it should
>be possible to extract the tarball by hand and do the deed. Not
>pretty, I know.
Will this be resolved for 5.3-RELEASE, or is the problem complicated on
a deeper level? If not for -RELEASE, will it ever happen in -STABLE? I
got the impression that one of the developers (I believe it was David
O'Brien) wanted to see a 64-bit kernel and (mostly) 32-bit world, as
having a 64-bit world isn't really all that beneficial. This, of course,
led me to thinking that work is being done to accomodate this in a
Am I way off the mark here?
Henrik W Lund
More information about the freebsd-amd64