Dan Kegel wrote:
On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
For Dan - one other issue came up so I thought I'd bring it here
before I did the new Wine build. Please keep in mind that this machine
is a Gentoo 64-bit machine and Wine, compiled as a 32-bit app, is
running over the top some 32-bit emulation libraries.
Not emulation libraries. They're plain old 32 bit libraries.
Building 32 bit wine on a 64 bit system is annoying.
I wouldn't bother unless you're quite motivated.
Those libraries,
as compiled, aren't going to provide any backtrace data. Will this
make any difference or is all we are concerned with is how Wine is
working internally?
No problem. We don't need symbols there.
Why is it that people run 64 bit operating systems on their
desktops? 99% of them would be happier with 32 bit OS's.
Shrug.
- Dan
Funny, my view is the exact opposite. I first used 64 bit on a Dec Alpha
in about 1993. I have been wondering ever since why anybody would want
to cling to 32 bit. Recently I have been puzzled as to why anybody would
want to run a 32 bit opsys on 64 bit hardware. I think they just sense a
lack of commitment from Microsoft. Incidentally, I heard that Microsoft
had a 64 bit version of NT (an early one 3.1 or 3.5) for the Dec Alpha
but never released it. They released a 32 bit version for the Alpha - so
everybody ran Tru64 unix instead. The attraction of 64 bit is address
space more than large physical memory. If you are mapping large files
the address space issue is significant. A windows 32 bit application can
get about 1.5GB of usable address space in an application and it is not
enough. I had better declare my bias; I implement an APL interpreter. A
significant number of my users are bouncing off address space
restrictions and are being held back because their users are constrained
to use 32 bit windows as a platform.
Geoff Streeter
Geoff Streeter
