[x86-64] AMD Dev Center usage proposal

[Arnd Bergmann]

=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 23 May 2003 21:08, Falk Hueffner wrote:

> I think we should concentrate on one kernel first. Assuming it is not
> totally broken currently, I'd prefer 2.4, since it is less of a moving
> target.

Agreed.=20

> > 5) port init script tools
> >   - ability to get to a prompt with only 64-bit binaries
> >   - sysvinit, util-linux, sh, grep, etc.
> >
> > 6) port remainder of the 'base' packages
> >   - this will be the majority of the effort (IIRC 50+ packages)
>
> If we manage to install a build daemon, I suppose this won't be
> actually all that much effort. I think we should try that right after
> step 4.

The autobuilder won't be much use unless we have ported a significant
amount of libraries by hand. I have a set of changes to dpkg and
debhelper that make the migration to /lib64 easier, but many libraries
still have to be fixed beyond what can be done automatically.
IMHO, 5) should actually be 'port all base libraries'.

> Other things to do:
>
> * Choose a name for the port. I vote for amd64, since it avoids the
>   nasty - vs _ problems and is also more likely to be recognized by
>   people in the future. I suppose "x86-64" is going the way of
>   "axp"...
Agreed.

> * Hack dpkg to understand the new architecture.
Yes. For the moment, we can keep building all packages as i386 .debs,
but later, dpkg needs to know that amd64 is a superset of i386. That
will require bigger changes than just adding another identifier
to some lists.

	Arnd <><
=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+zo5f5t5GS2LDRf4RAjpGAJ9r4xcxVq91RWdy+mAVkWPBgcugWACdFKRf
KY3p5eRKj4e2WlT6GXN5iQ8=3D
=3DikqL
=2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----