On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:26:12 -0500
Jarod Wilson <jarod(a)wilsonet.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 21:21 +0000, Andrea wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:16:55 +0000
> > Andrea <mariofutire(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
> > You can't just be ppc, as the ppc kernel won't boot on ppc64. You
> > shouldn't be all ppc64 either, because the ppc64 binaries tend to be
> > slower than their ppc counterparts. What you really need is a small
> > mix of both, but that makes developing one or the other somewhat
> > difficult. Welcome to the hell of multilib.
> > I suggest making use of mock to create chroots of pure archness to
> > develop with. Mock can give you a pure ppc chroot and a pure ppc64
> > chroot for which to develop in.
> To be honest, I am perfectly happy to live in a world of
> kernel is ppc64
> everything else is ppc
> So my plan is:
> 1) remove all devel packages for ppc64 and replace (if missing) with ppc
> 2) remove all duplicate applications ppc/ppc64 keeping only ppc
> 3) keep all libraries on both versions so I can (just in case) still run everything
> would that work?
iirc, there are a few userspace things where you really actually do want
the ppc64 version. I believe at least gdb and crash were on that list.
32-bit versions won't know what to do when analyzing 64-bit bits.