[RFC] what to name linux 32-bit compat

Gary Jennejohn garyj at jennejohn.org
Mon Jan 17 12:48:02 PST 2005

"David O'Brien" writes:
> [ Respect the Reply-to:! ]
> /usr/ports Linux 32-bit compatibility on AMD64 is a mess and too rough
> for what is expected of FreeBSD.  Anyway...
> We need to decide how to have both Linux i686 and Linux amd64 compat
> support live side-by-side.  At the moment my leanings are for
> /compat/linux32 and /compat/linux.  We could also go with /compat/linux
> and /compat/linux64 <- taking a page from the Linux LSB naming convention
> (ie, they have lib and lib64).
> Linux 32-bit support is most interesting -- that is how we get Acrobat
> reader and some other binary-only ports.  The only Linux 64-bit things we
> might want to run that truly matter 32-bit vs. 64-bit is Oracle and
> IBM-DB2.  For other applications 32-bit vs. 64-bit is mostly a "Just
> Because Its There(tm)" thing.  So making Linux 32-bit support the
> cleanest looking from a /usr/ports POV has some merit.
> What do others think?

I agree with this 100%. Besides, at the moment the really interesting
Linux applications for normal users, like realplayer, are only available
in 32-bit mode, AFAIK.

Gary Jennejohn / garyj[at]jennejohn.org gj[at]freebsd.org garyj[at]denx.de

More information about the freebsd-amd64 mailing list