Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 12:40:39 -0400 From: Jim <stapleton.41@gmail.com> To: Roland Smith <rsmith@xs4all.nl> Cc: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 32 bit ports on an AMD64 system Message-ID: <80f4f2b20909010940u460a7b81r6372f48690ac1246@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20090901155059.GA56945@slackbox.xs4all.nl> References: <d873d5be0908310811q7974f467xf772f95c662c5e19@mail.gmail.com> <80f4f2b20909010644j7962dc4cub71e725d083072ef@mail.gmail.com> <20090901155059.GA56945@slackbox.xs4all.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> [...] but the ability to use extra memory *and* dynamically load >> kernel modules is a bit more important to me. > > All FreeBSD supported platforms can dynamically load native kernel modules, so > why should that be a factor in choosing between i386 and amd64? > > Roland I didn't specify just loading modules, but extra memory as well (the beyond 4GB addressable space). Using the options in i386 that allow you to access memory beyond 4GB, also eliminates the ability to dynamically load kernel modules. -Jim Stapleton
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?80f4f2b20909010940u460a7b81r6372f48690ac1246>