| 1 |
On Monday 18 December 2006 13:39, Duncan wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> My point, however, was that since everything else I run is 64-bit, if |
| 4 |
> I didn't need the 32-bit tools to compile grub -- or if I was willing |
| 5 |
> to settle for the pre-compiled grub-static -- I could save myself a |
| 6 |
> *LOT* of extra work by simply using the no-multilib subprofile, thus |
| 7 |
> saving myself all that time compiling the 32-bit side of glibc and gcc |
| 8 |
> in particular. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
I believe that lilo can be built in a 64-bit only environment |
| 11 |
(no-multilib). |
| 12 |
I use the no-multilib subprofile, and a few days ago, I found out that |
| 13 |
lilo was not masked (ie, "emerge -a lilo" did prompt me to install the |
| 14 |
package), so I suppose that it should work even in my 64-bit, |
| 15 |
no-multilib system. (However, I did not actually merge it, since |
| 16 |
grub-static still works fine here, so I can't be 100% sure). |
| 17 |
Looking at the changelog, it seems that my suppositions are correct: |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
06 Jan 2006; Olivier Crête <tester@g.o> lilo-22.7.ebuild: |
| 20 |
Stable on amd64 |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
So, it's been stable for almost a year now. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Of course, this is not meant to be the start of another grub vs. lilo |
| 25 |
flamewar, but rather just a FYI. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives