A stupid 64bit question ... but ...

[Kris Kennaway]

On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 01:10:40AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 08:13:50AM +0100, Guillaume R. wrote:
> > 2005/12/5, David O'Brien <obrien at freebsd.org>:
> > > On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 06:50:55PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I recently bought a new Intel Xeon server, and when I put it together, I
> > > > didn't realize that the newer Xeon's were 64bit ... now, I've just built
> > > > perl 5.8.7, and its reporting:
> > > >
> > > > =================
> > > > # perl -v
> > > > This is perl, v5.8.7 built for i386-freebsd-64int
> > > ..
> > > > I realize that this  may be a stupid question, but am I correct in that
> > > > *this* is a 64bit machine, and I should be enabling the AMD64 stuff on
> > > > her?
> > >
> > > Perl won't be reporting a 64-bit capable machine, when running a 32-bit
> > > OS.  Look in /var/run/dmesg for 'AMD Features' to report 'LM' (long
> > > mode).
> > 
> > Lo
> > So why there is a 64int? We can suppose that perl has seen that Marc's proc
> > is a 64 one no?
> > I asked that cause I got a 64bits  (amd) which run on a 32 bits mode and I
> > got oftenly such "i386-freebsd-64amd"
> > ++
> 
> I'm not a perl expert - but maybe ints in perl actually are 64-bit.  Just
> because an x86 has only 32-bit wide regs, doesn't mean it cannot do
> 64-bit math.  :-)

The '64int' may stand for 'intel', just as the '64amd' stands for amd
:-)

Kris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20051205/6a420ebc/attachment.bin