From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 21 15:13:34 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B26416A47A for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:13:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tmh.public@gmail.com) Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.183]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAB2713C46E for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:13:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tmh.public@gmail.com) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id f47so99075pye for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2007 08:13:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type; b=qQwrAsQZf8CGOe8HHsIGt9HXjF0oLSin53ijH/SMoeVe2vkEdxjinJJLBpHo2Fy18MquhrycW9tvSgtAobGmQDNfeYHr9GsSBW0KkcRenof165PGchJR2OpWn8WiTHp01jLiUTbL6QXv95Ez/9DEEHuJIMe6N88JzUCls6NbA6M= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type; b=P+vLly/3DypkNgZ1FSAzy7u76xfRxOLi7MxMaBE9mzHRN+tuXhnTuIIhTP6yU9kkkmZYyj36pdDWPyieCuotVTbiG3hZSZ5D+3OKqkfmIS/ZuQ5eYHDNwZeaoLClZGn27q0zeYvAAsYpTHlRdoDOhBUx/XmhQ20vvNCu5pD/wI0= Received: by 10.35.128.17 with SMTP id f17mr1643534pyn.1174490013196; Wed, 21 Mar 2007 08:13:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.2? ( [63.231.163.138]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id n45sm3440172pyh.2007.03.21.08.13.30; Wed, 21 Mar 2007 08:13:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <46014B99.9090605@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 10:13:29 -0500 From: "Thomas M. Hermann" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070317) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Divacky Roman References: <46003EA9.6060305@gmail.com> <20070320220616.65b853a2@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <20070320211216.GA46105@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> In-Reply-To: <20070320211216.GA46105@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------060201030303000007080906" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Alexander Leidinger , freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linuxolator on AMD64 Guidance X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:13:34 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060201030303000007080906 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Divacky Roman wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 10:06:16PM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > >> Quoting "Thomas M. Hermann" (Tue, 20 Mar 2007 15:06:01 -0500): >> >> >>> Greetings, >>> >>> Is the goal of current linuxolator development to update support to >>> 2.6.16 to be 64bit on amd64 or just update to 2.6.16 and run 32bit apps >>> on amd64 as is done now? I've subscribed to freebsd-emulation & >>> >> The goal is to get 2.6.16 running. There's no active development for >> 64bit support on amd64 (at least I'm not aware of one). >> > > netbsd supports linux@amd64 emulation and I think I could do the port in > a few weeks. if I get decent access to amd64 machine and enough time/money :) > > but seriously... linux64 emulation is a MUST and I think the port of netbsd > code should not be THAT hard.... > > opinions? > Since there is not active development of 64bit support on amd64, then I advocate waiting until the 2.6.16 update is complete to start 64bit development. In the short term, being able to run 32bit apps reliably is better than being able run 64bit and 32bit apps unreliably. Besides, this motivates me to come to some arrangement with the vendor to get a native version, which is better than using the linux ABI anyway. Thanks, Tom -- === Thomas M. Hermann === --------------060201030303000007080906--