~amd64 ? [Solved]

jeanfrancis · Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:27 pm Post subject: ~amd64 ? [Solved]

Hi there!

I plan to buy a new laptop with a Core 2 Duo (maybe today

), and I searched a bit and decided to give a try to a 64 bits system... (I always been on a Pentium 4 with Gentoo)...

I have a question. I am running ~x86 without any problem. Is it that easy to run ~amd64!? I don't want to start to compile everything and see that my packages won't work...

Anybody running it?

derverstand · Guru Joined: 15 Dec 2005 Posts: 511 Location: /dev/null

Last friday I installed Gentoo on a amd64 server. So far everything works fine! (X, NIS, NFS, OpenPBS, mplayer, fvwm, cups, apache...) It was pretty staightforward. Only change was, that the /etc/portage/package.XYZs will differ from x86.

Best regards!

drescherjm · Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:53 pm Post subject:

jeanfrancis · Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:40 pm Post subject:

Thanks for your answers

Could one of you post your package.keywords? It would help me a bit to know which packages it is "safe" to start with.

Thanks!

derverstand · Guru Joined: 15 Dec 2005 Posts: 511 Location: /dev/null

/etc/make.conf

Bobnoxous · Apprentice Joined: 03 May 2005 Posts: 240

I don't recommend just adding packages to package.keywords. It various on what you install, what other packages are unmasked, new versions of sw, etc. Just build without anything unmasked, and as you find problems, then add packages to package.keywords.

There was a time when I had 20+ packages in package.keywords. I wanted to get away from that, so I started adding
>=pagkage-version ~amd64

so that as packages became stable, I didn't keep upgrading to unstable versions. Eventually, I was able to remove almost all unmasking of packages. Unless you want to be on the bleeding edge, of course.
_________________
"The problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so sure of themselves while wiser people are so full of doubt."
- Bertrand Russell

AaronPPC · Guru Joined: 29 May 2005 Posts: 522 Location: Tucson, AZ

I installed amd64 and went to ~amd64 within a week afterwards (I just couldn't help myself). I haven't had any problems.

jeanfrancis · Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:23 pm Post subject:

Thanks to you all.

I like to have newest packages of the apps I use daily (xfce, firefox, music players, Eclipse, etc.), so I'll surely add them in package.keywords to keep latest versions of them.

I'll maybe try ~amd64, but that seems really more dangerous than ~x86. If I try it that will be on another partition and I'll keep my "safe" version just in case

I keep the topic open, I want more opinions

drescherjm · Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:56 am Post subject:

jeanfrancis · Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:11 pm Post subject:

I think I'll start this way. Thanks!

devsk · Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:54 pm Post subject: Re: ~amd64 ? [Solved]

jeanfrancis · Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:58 pm Post subject:

Interesting... I can't choose!

i92guboj · Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:20 am Post subject:

Well, there are some separate issues. While you have a WORKING multilib environment with a SANE compiler, no crazy cflags and valid profile, you should not run into any more compilation issues for ~amd64 than you would have for ~x86. There are not much (~)amd64 specific problems at compile time nowadays. Though, as I said, that is if your multilib is not broken. If not, you can expect issues with some programs, like wine or grub to name a couple, but that should not be a problem in a sane installation.

Anyway, if you want a stable system, you should not even start to think about keywording a thing. Just do amd64, and then you can start to add things into keywords if you really need/want some specific package updated. I run ~amd64 in my desktop, and I have had no portage/gentoo specific problems on it. But that is my choice, and I never complain if I know that something has broken because of that. I also use some cvs stuff, I maintain my overlay manually and I know what exactly is into cvs, and I manually update it when needed, if at all. Of course, when running unstable you will have to keep the pieces yourself, I just wanted to point out that it works fine in a desktop for me, but that does not mean anything.

It is true that you will have still problems with some codecs and flash, though most people can usually work around this without any significant effort. But those are not problems specific to ~amd64, they are specific to any arch not supported by Adobe

jeanfrancis · Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:25 am Post subject:

What do you mean by multilib?

Hehe... Yes I know a bit about the "general" x86_64 problems... I read that firefox-bin is working fine and with it I'll run Flash in 32 bits correctly (if I'm right).

As I always take a lot of care of my packages, I'll give a try at ~amd64

i92guboj · Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:35 am Post subject:

A "multilib" system is capable of running 32 bits binaries, thanks to -amongst many other things- having compiled glibc with such support. There is also need to enable compatibility with IA32 binaries in the kernel, it is an option in the same place where you can activate ELF support and support for a.out binaries. Of course, it is only visible when using a 64 bits environment.

If you use the stage3 (which you should), you will not run into problems. Just set your profile to something different of the no-multilib profile. For example, you could use

jeanfrancis · Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:39 am Post subject:

I see

Will I have to do anything particular, for example to compile Wine? (standard emerge will do it for me?

)

Do you use the Desktop profile, or the 2006.1 "no desktop, no server" profile? The desktop profile has so much USE flags I don't know about or use... hmmm

i92guboj · Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:46 am Post subject:

Well, you can use the 2006.1 profile as well. They do not differ in any critical stuff, just some use flags. Any of the amd64 ones is ok, just don't choose the no-multilib one.

You will not need anything special to compile wine or any other stuff if the ebuilds are known to work on amd64 (wine and all the stable ones in portage should and I have not had any problem) and you are not using "no-multilib". Nowadays, to set a working amd64 system is not any more difficult that setting and x86 one.

jeanfrancis · Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:53 am Post subject:

Great

So let's go for Stage 3 + ~amd64 + 2006.1 "standard" profile

(or desktop profile with USE="-... -..." in make.conf)

jeanfrancis · Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:55 am Post subject:

Note: as soon as I get my laptop... I learned today that it may be unavailable... already 1 week late

jeanfrancis · Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:39 am Post subject:

Another small question... Here is the way I think I'll proceed, please correct it if necessary

- Follow the amd64 guide for stage3, portage, etc.
- Portage sync.
- Set to ~amd64, verify profile.
- update? (or can I go directly to emerge -e system?)
- emerge -e system twice (to ensure a consistent toolchain, built with a consistent toolchain

)
- install remaining applications (X, xfce, firefox, openoffice, etc)

keenblade · Veteran Joined: 03 Oct 2004 Posts: 1087

jeanfrancis · Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:35 am Post subject:

keenblade · Veteran Joined: 03 Oct 2004 Posts: 1087

i92guboj · Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:58 am Post subject:

i92guboj · Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:01 am Post subject: