Brad, Thank you for shedding the light on this subject. On Thu, 2004-01-22 at 08:59, Brad House wrote: > You're wrong on the performance front. That is a sparc > myth, and only applies to sparc. It is true that executables > will generally consume more memory, and therefore have longer > startup times, so for small apps that get run very often but > rarely do anything at all, it could theorhetically be slower. > But the fact is the performance numbers as a whole far outweigh > the statistically few apps that would be penalized. Things like > JAVA, SQL DBs, Mozilla, KDE/Gnome, POVRay, compilations, are > all considerably faster in 64bit mode from my experience. > > Also, with that same argument you made, why do we have a amd64 > port ?? Why don't we have just the stanard x86 port, that compiles > a 64bit kernel, and has a 32bit userland. Oh and yes, I am also > the lead for amd64 ... > > Basically trust me on this one, unless you have a machine that can > prove it. Like I said, sparc's are different beasts (too many poor > design choices IMHO) > > > > Brad, > > > > Why does ppc64 need a 64bit userland? > > > > It would seem to me that you would not want a 64 bit userland at all. > > From my understanding pure 64bit userlands tend to hurt performance > > because twice as much data is going across the bus as needed. > > Are -m32 -m64 not valid gcc/ld options for you? > > > > On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 08:50, Brad House wrote: > >> We DEFINATELY need ppc64!!!! > >> ppc64 is a 64bit kernel and 64bit userland > >> What ppc does is a 32bit kernel and a 32bit userland > >> What sparc64 does is a 64bit kernel and a 32bit userland > >> What sparc does is a 32bit kernel and a 32bit userland > >> See the main difference here, it's all in the userlands man! > >> > >> If anyone removes ppc64 keywords, I will personally lynch you. > >> > >> -Brad > >> > >> > maybe i'm lost with this but is there any reason we need ppc64 ? > >> > couldnt something be done with ppc/ppc64 like the sparc/sparc64 merge > >> ? > >> > -mike > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> -- > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > > -- > > Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Gentoo Linux Developer > > -- Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Linux Developer
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
