Re: Byte article - 64 bit Unix

Ray Auchterlounie (
Sun, 27 Oct 1996 11:21:55 GMT

Rob Glover <> wrote:
>Linux probably wasn't mentioned because Linux isn't 64-bit

Linux doesn't care - 32, 64, (16 !) whatever the architecture supports.

><jeez i hope i'm right so i don't get flamed ;>
I recall that you also suggested that people install an intel-only libc
to fix module loading, instead of a generic patch to insmod.

Many might consider it better to check data before writing it, rather
than write garbage and disclaim it's accuracy.

What are you going to claim next - "Linux is not portable" ?
[ you are Andy Tanenbaum and I claim my $5 ]


PS. I suggest getting a new copy of the kernel source, you appear to
be missing some stuff under linux/arch/ - it is possible that you have
somehow managed to hard-link arch to arch/i386.

Ray Auchterlounie                     <>
         "Forty Two! Is that all you've got to show for 
          seven and a half million years' work?"