Anthony Green writes: > On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 10:41 +0000, Gary Benson wrote: > > You could say the same for ls :) > > True. My only experience with multi-ABI systems so far has been > with MIPS64 Linux which, like x86-64, support 64- and 32-bit ABIs > (actually, two different 32-bit ABIs simultaneously, for a total of > 3). We chose to build all of userland with one of the 32-bit ABIs, > and then provide 64-bit libraries for application developers who > really wanted 64-bit of addressable memory for their apps. It > looks like x86-64 Linux is doing almost the exact opposite. > 64-bits is the default and 32-bit libs exist for compatibility. Right. And it's the right thing to do: 64-bit is noticeably faster, presuambly because there are more registers and there is a much better ABI. 32-bit x86 is only for backawards compatibility. Andrew.
