Linux - HardwareThis forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
It seems I have a few alternatives to select from.
1. I can install a full 64-bit system with all of it's libraries included.
xx: This is just too easy!
2. I can keep my 64-bit kernel and recompile gcc to build 64-bit packages.
xx: This is more of a challenge.
But now, if I choose the second option and rebuild gcc, I need to know something here. I know that I can compile gcc with the ability to create a 64-bit kernel (and likely other packages as well). But I want to know is:
1. Should the gcc package be compiled as a native 32-bit (i686) binary, defaulting to 32-bit builds with the option of 64-bit builds (using "gcc -m64")?
2. Could the gcc package be compiled in 64-bit (x86_64) format (on my 32-bit system), with the option of building 32-bit packages?
a): Is that even possible?
b): Would I need a 64-bit glibc for a 64-bit gcc to be usable on my system? Meaning that I would be required to wind up with a complete 64-bit system.
3. Is there a way to build a 64-bit version of gcc which defaults to 32-bit builds, requiring that gcc -m64 be declared for 64-bit builds?
Why don't you want easy? What are you actually trying to accomplish?
I need to compile 64-bit kernel modules for my system.
You have a 64bit kernel now? Or that was a typo?
Yes! I have a 64-bit Slamd64 kernel now.
Sounds reasonable. But what are you actually trying to accomplish?
The topic is compiling 64-bit kernels on a 32-bit system. I have 8 GBs of memory on this system. So I'm using a kernel that supports it. I choose not to use PAE, because it was stated that a 64-bit kernel is more efficient, especially on a 64-bit processor.
Then how would you use it? You can compile a 64-bit native gcc on a 32 bot system, but you couldn't run it there.
Yeah. I realize that now.
I'm sure it can be done. I don't know how. If you look at the options for making a gcc cross compiler, you should be able to find what you need.
I think I'm going to settle on recompiling the present compiler to allow 64-bit compiles. I don't want to run 64-bit applications. So that's not a problem.