| 1 |
On Wed, 26 Aug 2015, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> The main benefit is reduced compile times for some packages since I only |
| 4 |
> compile the 64-bit versions, less stuff on the filesystem, etc. If you |
| 5 |
> do not run any applications that use a 32-bit version of a library, that |
| 6 |
> library is taking up disk space and compile time, but is never used. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
The multilib profiles do not enable ABI_X86="32" by default so the default |
| 9 |
setup is to only build the 64-bit versions of everything. These profiles |
| 10 |
give you the _option_ to build both 32-bit and 64-bit things. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
The only things multilib by default on a multlib profile are pretty much |
| 13 |
glibc and gcc. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> I also am a bit of a purist, and just run no-multilib because it is |
| 16 |
> emotionally satisfying. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
The above reasons would make emotional satisfaction and purity the only |
| 19 |
reasons to go down this road. Doesn't mean they're not valid :) |
Archives