From: Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@firmix.at>
To: Antonio Vargas <windenntw@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: fat / multi arch binaries?
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:58:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1127944733.3340.6.camel@gimli.at.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <69304d110509281029a1b028a@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 19:29 +0200, Antonio Vargas wrote:
> On 9/28/05, Andreas Jellinghaus <aj@dungeon.inka.de> wrote:
[...]
> > does linux support binaries with code
> > for several architectures? I read that
> > elf allowes that, and for example
> > apple plans to use it on mac os X,
> > but I couldn't find anything whether
> > such binaries would work with linux
> > or not. can you tell me?
>
> OSX begat from NeXT and NeXT had these same "fat binaries". They are not new :)
Yup. For 4 archs IIRC.
> > if linux supports that, it should
> > also work for merging x86 and x86_64
> > into one binary? would ther be a way
>
> you don't want that ;)
ACK. It boils down to have n (i.e. lots of) cross-compilers installed.
Compiling needs n times as much time - you compile once for every
architecture. The binaries get much larger. You have to store and
transport them at startup (OK, this is pretty pathetic.) And then the
shared loader/kernel throws n-1 versions away.
On NeXT folks started to disable the FAT binaries just because of these
reasons.
ANd I hear the Intel-using world moan if they det on Debian >10 times as
large binaroes just to support MIPS and 68k ....
> > to run the 32bit version in the 64bit
> > kernel, if requested? are there any
>
> 32bit user-space can run 100% on 64bit kernel, this is usual in sparc
> if i'm not mistaken
And on Linux too. OO.org is on the major distros only as 32bit available
and runs "natively" on x86_64.
Actually the example is not that good.
> > tools to create such binaries?
> >
> > with google I found info from 97
> > that indicades elf format has no
> > provision for fat binaries and linux
> > doesn't support them. is that still
> > true?
>
> just remember that linux is mainly about source access, so having
> "fat" binaries is just wrong because the one-true-way is to get the
> sources and compile for your arch directly. this can be done by hand,
> semi-automated (aka gentoo) or automated (aka debian, fedora, etc...)
> by just installing from precompiled binaries
ACK. With apt-get/yum/portage/... most of the problems which were solved
with fat binaries a decade ago are already solved.
Bernd
--
Firmix Software GmbH http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
Embedded Linux Development and Services
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-28 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-28 17:18 Andreas Jellinghaus
2005-09-28 17:29 ` Antonio Vargas
2005-09-28 21:58 ` Bernd Petrovitsch [this message]
2005-09-29 0:30 ` Alan Cox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1127944733.3340.6.camel@gimli.at.home \
--to=bernd@firmix.at \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=windenntw@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®