From: Johan V. <Joh...@ad...> - 2004-09-30 12:49:21
|
hello, is there x86_64 support? Even only compiling uml in 32bit mode under x86_64 would be nice. how hard would it be to add full x86_64 support? thank you, J. |
From: David C. <li...@ed...> - 2004-09-30 14:47:23
|
On Thursday 30 September 2004 15:54, Johan Verrept wrote: > hello, > > is there x86_64 support? Even only compiling uml in 32bit mode under > x86_64 would be nice. > how hard would it be to add full x86_64 support? Try the list archive for this question. Look for posts by Jeff Dike. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=user-mode-linux-user&s=amd+64 David |
From: Jeff D. <jd...@ad...> - 2004-10-01 01:24:55
|
Joh...@ad... said: > is there x86_64 support? Even only compiling uml in 32bit mode > under x86_64 would be nice. > how hard would it be to add full x86_64 support? If you want the incremental patches page, you'll see x86_64 support going in. Jeff |
From: Johan V. <Joh...@ad...> - 2004-10-01 10:15:29
|
Jeff Dike wrote: >Joh...@ad... said: > > >> is there x86_64 support? Even only compiling uml in 32bit mode >>under x86_64 would be nice. >> how hard would it be to add full x86_64 support? >> >> > > >If you want the incremental patches page, you'll see x86_64 support going >in. > > Thank you. Can you tell me which of those patches I should apply to get a wrking build? Since it seems to contain patches that do not build (x86-64-signals), I am reluctant to install them all. regards, J. |