On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:24 AM, Ron Johnson<ron.l.john...@cox.net> wrote: > > But why the opposite, like lib64bz2-1.0 in the i386 repository?
Maybe just for the converse reason, running amd64 binaries on a mostly 32-bit userland setup. I guess this would work with a 32-bit kernel. For much the same reason, some libraries are compiled to take better advantage of 32-bit hardware than building them as if they were only a 386 or 486, for extra speed. libbz2 would likely qualify for special treatment like that, because it's compute-bound. Some years ago, when I was just starting out with Debian, and only had an Athlon Tbird (which couldn't do even some of the later intel multimedia & sse2 instructions) I had some libraries that were automatically installed that took advantage of extra features in 686 & higher processors. But I also found that there were a slew of amd64 libraries in /lib64 or someplace like that that also happened to get installed too. Eventually, I deleted those libraries as there wasn't going to be any way my CPU could make use of them. They shouldn't have gotten automatically installed. But of course, that was ao couple of years ago on testing (which eventually became etch). -- thanks for letting me change the magnetic patterns on your hard disk. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
