ATi & Intel graphics

Steve Franks stevefranks at
Wed Aug 13 19:25:50 UTC 2008

On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Roland Smith <rsmith at> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 02:20:45PM -0400, Jim wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:06 PM, John Nielsen <lists at> wrote:
>> > On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote:
>> >> At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want
>> >> three things.
>> >>
>> >> 64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well -
>> >> it's mostly a multimedia machine
>> >> decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few
>> >> games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS
>> >> doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be
>> >> better).
>> >> FreeBSD.
>> >
>> > You may want to rethink this. The emulators/wine port is i386-only:
>> >
>> > %grep -i arch /usr/ports/emulators/wine/Makefile
>> > ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386
>> >
>> I was under the impression you could build it with -m32 set in CFLAGS
>> and CXXFLAGS and it worked fine.
> IIRC, all the libraries that WINE depends on also need to be available
> in 32 bits. While not impossible nobody has spent any affort on this
> because it's easier just to install i386.
> Roland
> --
> R.F.Smith                         
> [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated]
> pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914  B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725)

I suppose it's naive to think that some tool like portupgrade could be
bent to build all the depends with -m32 as well?  I guess you'd wind
up with a bunch of things you didn't want as 32-bit (i.e. XOrg?) being
re-installed as 32bit, right?  I don't suppose there's any
infrastructure for simultaneously installing two versions of a port
(one of the reasons BSD doesn't crash as much as win32, no doubt, and
that we don't usually have .dll/.so hell)...still I might settle for a
32-bit X if I could have 64-bit disk & network still...


More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list