Bugs for Sorcery are reported here

[bugzilla-daemon AT metalab.unc.edu]

http://bugs.sourcemage.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5487





------- Additional Comments From gareth AT caffeinefuelled.com  2004-06-16 10:44 
-------
It's great that the new archspecs are in sorcery now. I was thinking though, 
if
we're to be able to run both 32-bit and 64-bit apps on the same system, we 
need
proper bi-architecture support.

This is from an ArsTechnica article
(http://arstechnica.com/etc/linux/2003/linux.ars-01142004-2.html):

"There is a downside though. To be able to run both types of binaries, you 
will
need libraries for them to link into as well. If you want to be able to run a
broad range of applications, this can quickly grow into alot of redundancy. 
Even
though hard drives are pretty large nowadays, it still provides a few 
headaches
as far as management goes. The glibc, gcc, and x86-64.org people decided that
64-bit libs go into /lib64 (even if a system is all 64-bit) and the 32-bit 
libs
go into /lib. These are the places ld.so looks at runtime based on what kind 
of
binary you are trying to run. There are loader programs, linux32 and linux64,
which are used to manually tell the machine which type of an executable you 
are
using. They munge the return value of uname and and fix some environment
variables and so forth, in case shell scripts might be involved. Packaging
systems like Portage and Apt have not yet caught up to the intricacies of /lib
and /lib64; they need bi-arch support for things to work right. Right now, the
tools do not understand the idea of having the same program installed twice, 
for
two different architectures. In the case of Gentoo, this is not  too big a 
deal
because almost everything builds fine from source and you rarely need 32-bit
binaries. In the case of Debian, this is a big holdup for proper AMD64 
support."

What do you guys think about this?



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.