[Vm-dev] 64bit FFI?

Eliot Miranda eliot.miranda at gmail.com
Thu Feb 12 18:59:06 UTC 2009

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:

> Eliot Miranda wrote:
>> I see that Bert, but Andreas is asking something different.  He is asking
>> if the existing 32-bit system can be run on a 64-bit platform, not that one
>> can run a 64-bit VM on a 64-bit platform.  In Qwaq we have 32-bit server
>> images and Andreas is interested in using these images largely unchanged to
>> run as 64-bit processes.
> Well, actually, I am asking both ;-) The real problem is elsewhere. We have
> two issues that we need to address, one is the need for 32 bit libraries on
> a 64 bit system[*] and the other one is the need for utilization of more
> memory. The latter is a minor issue though, the real problem is the former.
> Because of this, I really don't care whether the image is 32 or 64 bit, but
> I *do* care whether the library the VM links against and that the plugins
> (FFI above all else) will work in the 64bit environment.
> So in short, a 64bit VM is a must, a 64bit image somewhat optional.
> [*] Really, the problem is conflicts between the two. Some libraries cannot
> have both 32 and 64 bit versions installed on the same box and unfortunately
> ODBC (which we rely heavily on) is one of those.

That's funny.  This is on linux right?  I always thought that the linux
scheme of keeping the old names /lib, /usr/lib etc 32-bit and adding /lib64
/usr/lib64 was a neat way of allowing old 32-bit binaries to run unchanged.
 So where is the conflict with the ODBC libraries?

> Cheers,
>  - Andreas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/attachments/20090212/9c8d56f1/attachment.htm

More information about the Vm-dev mailing list