| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
afabco
Guru
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 380
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 12:37 am Post subject: amd64 - which profile? install guide unclear. |
 |
|
Code listing 7 in the AMD64 install guide:
| Quote: | Code Listing 7: Verifying system profile
# ls -FGg /etc/make.profile
lrwxrwxrwx 1 48 Apr 8 18:51 /etc/make.profile -> ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2007.0/
The default profile will provide you with a Linux 2.6-based system. This is the recommended default, but you have the option of choosing another profile too. |
leads one to believe that the recommended default is x86. Is this correct? If so, why did I buy an amd64?
thx
_________________
Anyone who puts a small gloss on a fundamental technology, calls it proprietary, and then tries to keep others from building on it, is a thief.
-Tim O'Reilly |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
freelight
Apprentice
Joined: 12 Jun 2004
Posts: 295
Location: NYC, NY, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
You can use either 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x86-64/amd64) with an AMD64 chip, as I'm sure you're aware. x86 is considered more stable, hence it's recommended in the install guide. For a 64-bit install, use /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2007.0 as your profile. I'm not sure if this was intended or an oversight in the AMD64 guide.
Be sure to set up your make.conf accordingly.
_________________
"If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?" --Thomas Jefferson
"Let the gremlins eat your soul... it's invigorating." --LD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
afabco
Guru
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 380
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
thx
_________________
Anyone who puts a small gloss on a fundamental technology, calls it proprietary, and then tries to keep others from building on it, is a thief.
-Tim O'Reilly |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
96140
Retired Dev
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 1324
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
--
Last edited by 96140 on Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:57 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AllenJB
Veteran
Joined: 02 Sep 2005
Posts: 1285
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I'd like to dispute the claim the amd64 is any less stable than x86. I run amd64 on several machines without any stability issues what so ever. Please don't spread unfounded, unsupported claims like this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neysx
Retired Dev
Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Posts: 795
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:25 pm Post subject: Re: amd64 - which profile? install guide unclear. |
|
|
| afabco wrote: | Code listing 7 in the AMD64 install guide:
| Quote: | Code Listing 7: Verifying system profile
# ls -FGg /etc/make.profile
lrwxrwxrwx 1 48 Apr 8 18:51 /etc/make.profile -> ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2007.0/ |
leads one to believe that the recommended default is x86. Is this correct? If so, why did I buy an amd64? |
If you used the AMD64 stage3, it would display .../amd64/2007.0
Doc never said you should change the default to the shown example.
I just made the output of the command display the default profile that matches the one in the stage3 so that the doc is more consistent with the ARCH.
Hth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
i92guboj
Bodhisattva
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 10315
Location: Córdoba (Spain)
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| freelight wrote: | You can use either 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x86-64/amd64) with an AMD64 chip
|
True.
| Quote: |
, as I'm sure you're aware. x86 is considered more stable, hence it's recommended in the install guide.
|
False. Part of the reasons are explained above by other people. I will only add that amd64 is not less stable than x86. It is just a different architecture, and each package will have -possibly- different keywords for different architectures. That is enough to guarantee the same level of stability regardless of the architecture.
That adobe/macromedia doesn't have a plugin for amd64 doesn't make it any less stable, if that is what you wanted to say. And in any case, it is not a problem of the architecture not gentoo for that matter.
| Quote: |
Be sure to set up your make.conf accordingly. |
Be sure you don't change make.conf on a radical manner, because, amongst many other things, changing chost (which is what is needed to change word size -32 vs. 64- that your programs will be using) is not trivial. In other words: if you use a 32 bit livecd, you will get a 32 bit installation, if you use an amd64 livecd, your kernel and binaries will be all for 64 bits. Just make sure you pick the correct livecd for the install type you want to do. You don't need to set anything in your make.conf to choose if you want 32 or 64 bits. If you used the correct stage, there's nothing else you really ought to do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raptor911
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Posts: 82
Location: California, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | changing chost (which is what is needed to change word size -32 vs. 64- that your programs will be using) is not trivial. |
You can say that again, I tried to make the jump from 32 to 64 bits and could not even get gcc to build.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
i92guboj
Bodhisattva
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 10315
Location: Córdoba (Spain)
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The only supported way to do that is to reinstall.
As I said above, transforming your installation from one arch to any other -even if they are that close like amd64 and x86- is not trivial, and it is not something I would recommend to anyone that needs to ask "how".
If you want to migrate from amd64 to x86, or from x86 to amd64, you need to reinstall from scratch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo on AMD64
