[CentOS] Is Biarch with 6.x now dead?
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.comWed Dec 28 17:15:03 UTC 2011
- Previous message: [CentOS] Is Biarch with 6.x now dead?
- Next message: [CentOS] Is Biarch with 6.x now dead?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Michael Lampe <lampe at gcsc.uni-frankfurt.de> wrote: > Les Mikesell wrote: > >> Why not use a virtual machine for that and have a cleaner separation >> of the architectures? > > Biarch runs natively and therfore faster, it can use > hardware-accelerated OpenGL, it is easier to setup and use, and it is > fully supported by TUV. To me the separation of arcitectures is clean > enough and you simply switch from 64-bit-mode to 32-bit-mode by typing > 'linux32'. How can it be better with a virtual machine? Why does a compiler need OpenGL? And with separate machines (physical or virtual) you would just open windows on both at the same time. > Also consider for example a compute cluster. It will of course have the > 64-bit version of CentOS installed, but some users may also want to run > 32-Bit-Code on it (because it's faster in their case, because their code > isn't 64-bit-clean yet, or because it's a 32-bit-only commercial code, > whatever). Having run-time libs for both isn't a problem. But if you want to test that something will run on a real 32 bit machine, a VM would be a more realistic test. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
- Previous message: [CentOS] Is Biarch with 6.x now dead?
- Next message: [CentOS] Is Biarch with 6.x now dead?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS mailing list