Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
2009/10/24 Till Maas opensou...@till.name: For me it would be useful to have a simple way to make a USB installation device for both my 32bit and 64bit machines. Also a single rescue system for both 64bit and 32bit machines would be nice. I agree; grub2 can boot iso images and seems to come handy for that task, this guide was helpful also: http://www.panticz.de/MultiBootUSB -- Guido Grazioli guido.grazi...@gmail.com Via Parri 11 48011 - Alfonsine (RA) Mobile: +39 347 1017202 (10-18) Key FP = 7040 F398 0DED A737 7337 DAE1 12DC A698 5E81 2278 Linked in: http://www.linkedin.com/in/guidograzioli -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
I just saw this article about an effort to create Universal binary style ELF binaries for Linux, and I thought that this would be something to watch, so that Fedora could integrate both x86-32 and x86-64 into single DVD sets. I don't suggest to do that. As already mentioned, that would double the size of the distro/iso. I would use this technic only, if neccessary. About fat-elf in general: As long as it is optional, I am fine with it. May it at compile time or after compiling by stripping binaries. (I'd like to see both options.) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
Well, possibly the only thing fatELF would be needed for would be to rid ourselves of multilib. Applications don't even need to be FatELF to link to FatELF libraries. On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Ikem Krueger ikem.krue...@googlemail.comwrote: I just saw this article about an effort to create Universal binary style ELF binaries for Linux, and I thought that this would be something to watch, so that Fedora could integrate both x86-32 and x86-64 into single DVD sets. I don't suggest to do that. As already mentioned, that would double the size of the distro/iso. I would use this technic only, if neccessary. About fat-elf in general: As long as it is optional, I am fine with it. May it at compile time or after compiling by stripping binaries. (I'd like to see both options.) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
On 10/22/2009 10:22 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Sam Varshavchik wrote: 32 bits will be here for a long, long time, of course At most 29 years. 32-bit GNU/Linux doesn't support dates beyond 2038. This only actually means we've got 29 years to extend time_t . -- Peter All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 07:14:39AM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote: On 10/23/2009 07:01 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: It was (mostly) ignored because it doubles the download size and makes the image no longer fit on a CD, for little benefit. Yes. It is a solution which adds costs in many, many places for a problem that doesn't exist. I don't see why people even spend a second thinking about this. For me it would be useful to have a simple way to make a USB installation device for both my 32bit and 64bit machines. Also a single rescue system for both 64bit and 32bit machines would be nice. Regards Till -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
Once upon a time, Till Maas opensou...@till.name said: For me it would be useful to have a simple way to make a USB installation device for both my 32bit and 64bit machines. Also a single rescue system for both 64bit and 32bit machines would be nice. A much better approach would be to get the image tools (both install and LiveCD) to support more than one image on a device (DVD or USB). -- Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
Dne 22.10.2009 19:28, King InuYasha napsal(a): I just saw this article about an effort to create Universal binary style ELF binaries for Linux, and I thought that this would be something to watch, so that Fedora could integrate both x86-32 and x86-64 into single DVD sets. http://icculus.org/fatelf/ There is even a proof of concept VM of Ubuntu 9.04 that has both 32-bit and 64-bit kernels and all the apps compiled as FatELF binaries Wandering minds ask what is it good for? I hoped that with Snow Leopard being intel-only Apple Universal Binaries will finally wither to bad memories of past (somewhere around the Berlin Wall and Third Reich :)), and that whole concept of multilib will follow in due course after them. Matěj -- http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/, Jabber: mceplatceplovi.cz GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC Pain is inevitable, but misery is optional. We cannot avoid pain, but we can avoid joy. -- Tim Hansel -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:28:36 +0200, King InuYasha wrote:
I just saw this article about an effort to create Universal binary style ELF
binaries for Linux, and I thought that this would be something to watch, so
that Fedora could integrate both x86-32 and x86-64 into single DVD sets.
While I do not find useful fat-elf I did post an implementation of auto-biarch
Fedora LiveDVD but it was ignored. Still keep it around personally myself.
Attached the post, former followups to it at:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-livecd-list/2009-June/msg00018.html
Regards,
Jan
---BeginMessage---
Hi,
finally created a LiveDVD ISO automatically booting x86_64 OS on x86_64
(and i686 otherwise). Regular users will not notice there exists any new arch
while they will benefit from the full performance of their PC:
http://people.redhat.com/jkratoch/x86bilive-2009062000.tar.gz (71KB)
It uses live_dir=LiveOS-x86_64 vs. live_dir=LiveOS-i686 to boot the image.
The syslinux patch provides default-{x86_64,i386} keywords in isolinux.cfg.
livecd-iso-to-disk is not patched/compatible with such image.
livecd-creator should create such ISO on a single run, not by merging the
output of two livecd-creator runs by a 3rd party app.
Regards,
Jan
Reasons:
* I still did not understand why I have to carry with me two media - both
x86_64 and i386 - when all the data perfectly fit on a single media.
* Why I have to try to boot x86_64 first to find out if the specific machine
is x86_64? Even common programmers do not know it, Windows XP works here.
* The OS must just work, it must be fun and easy. Requiring a special
technical decision before even starting the OS download is a showstopper.
* Checked that a regular user will on http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora
still download terrible performance degradation of 32-bit OS although her
hadware is in 70%-95%(?) of cases x86_64. x86_64 is here for 6 years now.
* Arguing x86 may be faster than x86_64... I did not find any such case,
x86_64 is a more modern arch (more registers, PIC for free, better ABI).
We already hit the 2GB address space limitations. x86_64 is the future.
* All the friends of mine have 8Mbit+ ADSL and TB disks downloading many DVD
disks so some several more hundreds of MB are not something to notice.
mkisofs -f -J -r -hide-rr-moved -hide-joliet-trans-tbl -V Fedora-11-x86bi-Live
-o ../x86bilive.iso -b isolinux/isolinux.bin -c isolinux/boot.cat -no-emul-boot
-boot-info-table -boot-load-size 4 .
mount -r -o loop Fedora-11-x86_64-Live.iso x86_64/
mount -r -o loop Fedora-11-i686-Live.iso i686/
x86bilive:
total 4
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 2009-06-18 21:10 GPL - ../x86_64/GPL
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 2009-06-18 21:11 LiveOS-i686 - ../i686/LiveOS/
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 2009-06-18 21:10 LiveOS-x86_64 - ../x86_64/LiveOS/
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 2009-06-18 21:10 README - ../x86_64/README
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2009-06-20 21:44 isolinux/
x86bilive/isolinux:
total 184
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 30 2009-06-18 21:13 boot.cat -
../../x86_64/isolinux/boot.cat
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 31 2009-06-18 21:17 ii686 -
../../i686/isolinux/initrd0.img
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 14336 2009-06-20 21:45 isolinux.bin
-r--r--r-- 1 root root 1411 2009-06-20 21:44 isolinux.cfg
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 33 2009-06-18 21:13 ix8664 -
../../x86_64/isolinux/initrd0.img
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 28 2009-06-18 21:17 ki686 -
../../i686/isolinux/vmlinuz0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 30 2009-06-18 21:13 kx8664 -
../../x86_64/isolinux/vmlinuz0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 29 2009-06-18 21:13 memtest -
../../x86_64/isolinux/memtest
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 32 2009-06-18 21:13 splash.jpg -
../../x86_64/isolinux/splash.jpg
-r--r--r-- 1 root root 159888 2009-06-20 20:48 vesamenu.c32
isolinux.cfg:
default vesamenu.c32
timeout 100
menu background splash.jpg
menu title Welcome to Fedora-11-x86bi-Live!
menu color border 0 # #
menu color sel 7 # #ff00
menu color title 0 # #
menu color tabmsg 0 # #
menu color unsel 0 # #
menu color hotsel 0 #ff00 #
menu color hotkey 7 # #ff00
menu color timeout_msg 0 # #
menu color timeout 0 # #
menu color cmdline 0 # #
menu hidden
menu hiddenrow 5
label linux0
menu label x86_64 Boot
kernel kx8664
append initrd=ix8664 root=CDLABEL=Fedora-11-x86bi-Live rootfstype=auto
live_dir=LiveOS-x86_64 ro liveimg quiet rhgb
menu default-x86_64
label check0
menu label x86_64 Verify and Boot
kernel kx8664
append initrd=ix8664 root=CDLABEL=Fedora-11-x86bi-Live rootfstype=auto
live_dir=LiveOS-x86_64 ro liveimg quiet rhgb check
label linux1
menu label i686 Boot
kernel ki686
append initrd=ii686 root=CDLABEL=Fedora-11-x86bi-Live rootfstype=auto
live_dir=LiveOS-i686 ro liveimg quiet rhgb
menu default-i386
label check1
menu label i686 Verify and Boot
kernel
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
Jan Kratochvil wrote: While I do not find useful fat-elf I did post an implementation of auto-biarch Fedora LiveDVD but it was ignored. It was (mostly) ignored because it doubles the download size and makes the image no longer fit on a CD, for little benefit. Again, the right solution is to point people to the 64-bit version by default. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Fedora with Universal Binaries?
Hello, I just saw this article about an effort to create Universal binary style ELF binaries for Linux, and I thought that this would be something to watch, so that Fedora could integrate both x86-32 and x86-64 into single DVD sets. http://icculus.org/fatelf/ There is even a proof of concept VM of Ubuntu 9.04 that has both 32-bit and 64-bit kernels and all the apps compiled as FatELF binaries -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 12:28 -0500, King InuYasha wrote: http://icculus.org/fatelf/ There is even a proof of concept VM of Ubuntu 9.04 that has both 32-bit and 64-bit kernels and all the apps compiled as FatELF binaries Except, they're not really ELF binaries. ELF doesn't allow you to do both at the same time in the headers, so this adds a new header and is essentially an encapsulation for other ELF files. Thus, a kernel patch is required and it would be some time before all kernels supported it. I'm not against the notion of this...but I think some of the usual suspects need to get involved in standardizing such an ELF hack. (You might be able to do something with binfmt_misc as a hack) Jon. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am 22.10.2009 19:38, schrieb Jon Masters: Except, they're not really ELF binaries. ELF doesn't allow you to do both at the same time in the headers, so this adds a new header and is essentially an encapsulation for other ELF files. Thus, a kernel patch is required and it would be some time before all kernels supported it. I'm not against the notion of this...but I think some of the usual suspects need to get involved in standardizing such an ELF hack. (You might be able to do something with binfmt_misc as a hack) Jon. Creating FatELF binaries doesn't solve any x86_64 related issues. For example: Old releases of blender was not able to creates proper .blend files when the binary was compiled for x86_64. In this case the created files was not usable on the x86_32 release. Best Regards: Jochen Schmitt -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iJwEAQECAAYFAkrgmcEACgkQZLAIBz9lVu++FgP/br8KeMY5vp8V88xv4hoH9pyV 2vuJJyhszaWl/qFN9Iax7Q5p1A3muC/BFHhUu6VWphB2xIj9EXkMhubgVtX7OBBc J+v/wv0bWU2kBVFsYDUcfoiTkxluI4uuttTRoqZm7TUuc9/EMBVwzWGeqsBYoFej xV9jjWk4dGJ/sFlFC3I= =uZBp -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 19:43 +0200, Jochen Schmitt wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am 22.10.2009 19:38, schrieb Jon Masters: Except, they're not really ELF binaries. ELF doesn't allow you to do both at the same time in the headers, so this adds a new header and is essentially an encapsulation for other ELF files. Thus, a kernel patch is required and it would be some time before all kernels supported it. I'm not against the notion of this...but I think some of the usual suspects need to get involved in standardizing such an ELF hack. (You might be able to do something with binfmt_misc as a hack) Jon. Creating FatELF binaries doesn't solve any x86_64 related issues. For example: Old releases of blender was not able to creates proper .blend files when the binary was compiled for x86_64. In this case the created files was not usable on the x86_32 release. That's just a cross-platform compat issue. People had issues like that for years porting between Mac and Windows with different type sizes and endianness. Without and direct knowledge of the problem, that sounds like somebody forgot to either (a) use an inherently cross-platform file format like XML, or (b) forgot to write sane file format encode/decode routines that were cross-platform clean, or (c) included executable code in the file format specification (which is pretty stupid). Or? We'd expect a program built on any platform to save/load a specific file format written by that same program built on any other platform. Otherwise that program is just broken. Dan -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
King InuYasha wrote: I just saw this article about an effort to create Universal binary style ELF binaries for Linux, and I thought that this would be something to watch, so that Fedora could integrate both x86-32 and x86-64 into single DVD sets. http://icculus.org/fatelf/ Yuck!!! Please don't infect GNU/Linux with this completely braindead crap! This wastes a lot of disk space and download bandwidth and probably also increases loading times for NO reason whatsoever. It also doubles the build times for any and all software. Just figure out what arch your machine is and install the correct package for your arch! Fat binaries are a method to make crappy binary-only software distribution easier, they have no room on a Free Software system. Let the Mac folks keep their fat crap and leave our binaries as native for the appropriate arch! Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.atwrote: King InuYasha wrote: I just saw this article about an effort to create Universal binary style ELF binaries for Linux, and I thought that this would be something to watch, so that Fedora could integrate both x86-32 and x86-64 into single DVD sets. http://icculus.org/fatelf/ Yuck!!! Please don't infect GNU/Linux with this completely braindead crap! This wastes a lot of disk space and download bandwidth and probably also increases loading times for NO reason whatsoever. It also doubles the build times for any and all software. Just figure out what arch your machine is and install the correct package for your arch! Fat binaries are a method to make crappy binary-only software distribution easier, they have no room on a Free Software system. Let the Mac folks keep their fat crap and leave our binaries as native for the appropriate arch! Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list I dunno, it could be useful for Live CDs/USBs. It would let you pack multiple arches onto a single LiveCD/USB. You sound like one of those crazy people that disregard everything that may slightly help proprietary software. It's probably possible to strip out arches when they become unneeded, if so desired. I know it is possible under Mac OS X to do that. If you had a system that had extra arches you didn't need, you probably could just go and strip them out to save disk space. There isn't much proof to your statement about loading fat binaries. I don't notice a slow down in load times of Universal binaries on my Mac, but I do notice the disk space. As it is, Snow Leopard now uses Universal binaries to pack x86_32 and x86_64 into a single application container and can strip out PowerPC binary code. Don't knock it till you try it... -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
King InuYasha wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at mailto:kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: King InuYasha wrote: I just saw this article about an effort to create Universal binary style ELF binaries for Linux, and I thought that this would be something to watch, so that Fedora could integrate both x86-32 and x86-64 into single DVD sets. http://icculus.org/fatelf/ Yuck!!! Please don't infect GNU/Linux with this completely braindead crap! This wastes a lot of disk space and download bandwidth and probably also increases loading times for NO reason whatsoever. It also doubles the build times for any and all software. Just figure out what arch your machine is and install the correct package for your arch! Fat binaries are a method to make crappy binary-only software distribution easier, they have no room on a Free Software system. Let the Mac folks keep their fat crap and leave our binaries as native for the appropriate arch! Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com mailto:fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list I dunno, it could be useful for Live CDs/USBs. It would let you pack multiple arches onto a single LiveCD/USB. Yeah, but they'd be larger, forcing removal of software from the images. You sound like one of those crazy people that disregard everything that may slightly help proprietary software. It's probably possible to strip out arches when they become unneeded, if so desired. I know it is possible under Mac OS X to do that. If you had a system that had extra arches you didn't need, you probably could just go and strip them out to save disk space. So. . .then why do it? There are practical considerations here. There isn't much proof to your statement about loading fat binaries. I don't notice a slow down in load times of Universal binaries on my Mac, but I do notice the disk space. As it is, Snow Leopard now uses Universal binaries to pack x86_32 and x86_64 into a single application container and can strip out PowerPC binary code. Don't knock it till you try it... Strip out where? Build time, install time, or run time? -- in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
tor 2009-10-22 klockan 12:28 -0500 skrev King InuYasha: I just saw this article about an effort to create Universal binary style ELF binaries for Linux, and I thought that this would be something to watch, so that Fedora could integrate both x86-32 and x86-64 into single DVD sets. There's already lib / lib64 for parallell-installation of libraries, though granted it's limited to only two arches, but yes, something that covers bin too would be useful. But I doubt fat binaries are the answer. You'd probably end up with having rpm merge /usr/bin/xxx from different packages into a single fatelf file upon installation, rather than putting the fat elves in the RPM file. Instead, I think it would be better to extend FHS to support parallell install of binaries in a way that gives each arch its own file. But still, regardless if you go with a new binary format or with fat filesystems, you end up blurring the line between native compilation and cross-compilation. An extended FHS would probably have to deal with that. (Fedora doesn't guarantee parallell install of -devel packages, for example.) /abo -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:28:36 -0500, King InuYasha ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: I just saw this article about an effort to create Universal binary style ELF binaries for Linux, and I thought that this would be something to watch, so that Fedora could integrate both x86-32 and x86-64 into single DVD sets. Sounds like a kludge to work around limitations of dpkg. -- Pete -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
Pete Zaitcev writes: On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:28:36 -0500, King InuYasha ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: I just saw this article about an effort to create Universal binary style ELF binaries for Linux, and I thought that this would be something to watch, so that Fedora could integrate both x86-32 and x86-64 into single DVD sets. Sounds like a kludge to work around limitations of dpkg. Not really. Something like this would allow you to have a single boot image for both 32 and 64 bit hosts. 32 bits will be here for a long, long time, of course, but its days are numbered, so I don't think it makes practical sense to invest the effort in implementing FAT ELF format. There might be some practical benefit if its scope was expanded to support arbitrary binary ABIs, i.e. a single ELF image containing x86_64 and sparc64, perhaps. pgpPUNmFHH98g.pgp Description: PGP signature -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
King InuYasha wrote: I dunno, it could be useful for Live CDs/USBs. It would let you pack multiple arches onto a single LiveCD/USB. The Live CDs are already full without supporting this completely useless feature. Surely, the real solution is to position the 64-bit version more prominently (instead of driving everyone to the obsolescent 32-bit version), not to bloat the CDs with double-size binaries. You sound like one of those crazy people that disregard everything that may slightly help proprietary software. I don't see why we should ship our own binaries in a format which ONLY helps proprietary software. They can ship whatever they want if they can get the kernel to accept their nonstandard ELF. (That said, it's true that I also do think supporting anything which only helps proprietary software is counterproductive. This also includes some stuff we're currently doing, like shipping ancient compat-libstdc++ versions. We need to encourage third-party developers to ship Free Software, not proprietary software! But that wasn't even the point here, supporting Fat ELF isn't what I primarily object to, using it is!) Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora with Universal Binaries?
Alexander Boström wrote: There's already lib / lib64 for parallell-installation of libraries, though granted it's limited to only two arches, but yes, something that covers bin too would be useful. bin is not multilib for a reason. You don't need 32-bit binaries on a 64-bit machine unless there's no 64-bit version. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
