You really should not be mixing your architectures like this. I am not sure what trouble that can cause, but I cannot imagine
that it does not, especially when some of these dependencies it is asking for would require OVERWRITING the 64-bit versions in
order to be installed (if apt would even let you do that).
i'm pretty sure this has been sussed since it was 3 months ago but one word... multiarch... it allows both 32bit and 64bit apps to run and keeps the libs separate to that each can load what they need...
There is nothing stopping you from running 32bit apps on a 64bit linux. For example on Ubuntu you can have both 32bit & 64bit versions of the libraries. I depend on that in a lot of my doors...
Re: Re: New door bundle, Ambr
By: Marisag to wkitty42 on Mon Jul 08 2019 01:04 pm
There is nothing stopping you from running 32bit apps on a 64bit linux. For example on Ubuntu you can have both 32bit & 64bit versions of the libraries. I depend on that in a lot of my doors...
Recently I heard Ubuntu wanted to drop all 32-bit support going forward.
Now it sounds like Ubuntu has decided to keep supporting selected 32-bit libraries.
i'm pretty sure this has been sussed since it was 3 months ago but one
word... multiarch... it allows both 32bit and 64bit apps to run and keeps
the libs separate to that each can load what they need...
There is nothing stopping you from running 32bit apps on a 64bit linux.
For example on Ubuntu you can have both 32bit & 64bit versions of the libraries. I depend on that in a lot of my doors...
i'm pretty sure this has been sussed since it was 3 months ago but one word... >ultiarch... it allows both 32bit and 64bit apps to run and keeps the libs separ
te to that each can load what they need...
Recently I heard Ubuntu wanted to drop all 32-bit support going
forward. Now it sounds like Ubuntu has decided to keep supporting
selected 32-bit libraries.
that's gonna suck because my irc services are 32bit.
that's gonna suck because my irc services are 32bit.
I can kinda understand the decision, but at the same time, I think it would be good to keep supporting 32-bit software. 64-bit Intel-compatible CPUs support it in the hardware, and I think it would make sense for OSes to continue supporting it in the software too. When hardware support for it dies, perhaps OSes can drop it at that point (and we would have to run emulators for it).
On 07-09-19 18:34, Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-
I can kinda understand the decision, but at the same time, I think it would be good to keep supporting 32-bit software. 64-bit
Intel-compatible CPUs support it in the hardware, and I think it would make sense for OSes to continue supporting it in the software too.
When hardware support for it dies, perhaps OSes can drop it at that
point (and we would have to run emulators for it).
I don't see hardware support for 32 bit dying anytime toon. Adterall, modern CPUs can still run 16 bit software, if running in real mode or virtual 8086 mode.
Re: Re: New door bundle, Ambr
By: Vk3jed to Nightfox on Wed Jul 10 2019 04:57 pm
I don't see hardware support for 32 bit dying anytime toon. Adterall, modern CPUs can still run 16 bit software, if running in real mode or virtual 8086 mode.
I think only 32-bit processors have hardware support for running 16-bit software? 64-bit processors lack that feature and only go back as far as 32-bit software. If you want to run 16-bit software on a 64-bit processor these days, you'll need to use an emulator of some kind.
I think only 32-bit processors have hardware support for running
16-bit software? 64-bit processors lack that feature and only go back
as far as 32-bit software. If you want to run 16-bit software on a
64-bit processor these days, you'll need to use an emulator of some
kind.
"real mode" is the true 8086 16-bit compatible mode (capable of running PC/MS-DOS) of all x86 CPUs. Processors supporting x86-64 (64-bit x86) still power on in real mode for full backward compatibility, as x86 processors have done since the 80286.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64
Re: Re: New door bundle, Ambr
By: Digital Man to Nightfox on Wed Jul 10 2019 12:45 pm
I think only 32-bit processors have hardware support for running
16-bit software? 64-bit processors lack that feature and only go back
as far as 32-bit software. If you want to run 16-bit software on a
64-bit processor these days, you'll need to use an emulator of some
kind.
"real mode" is the true 8086 16-bit compatible mode (capable of running PC/MS-DOS) of all x86 CPUs. Processors supporting x86-64 (64-bit x86) still power on in real mode for full backward compatibility, as x86 processors have done since the 80286. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64
Interesting.. I've always heard that 64-bit x86 processors aren't able to run 16-bit DOS apps, hence the occasional question about DOS doors failing to run on BBSes running in 64-bit Windows. I knew 64-bit Windows doesn't have the 16-bit DOS subsystem, and I thought that was because a 64-bit processor lacks support for 16-bit software, but perhaps that's not true?
Come to think of it, my BBS machine is running a 64-bit Linux, and is running a 32-it Windows in a VM, and the 32-bit Windows is able to run DOS doors even though the host processor is a 64-bit processor..
On 07-10-19 09:36, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I think only 32-bit processors have hardware support for running 16-bit software? 64-bit processors lack that feature and only go back as far
as 32-bit software. If you want to run 16-bit software on a 64-bit processor these days, you'll need to use an emulator of some kind.
If you booted the processer into "real mode", it certainly could run 16-bit software. But that's it. You can't run any 32-bit or 64-bit software in "real mode".
Running DOS in emulator is different than running DOS in real mode. There's another x86 mode called virtual 86 mode: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_8086_mode
x64 processors running in 64-bit mode not support virtual 86 mode. That's the issue. So if you run an x64 processor in 32-bit (e.g. running a 32-bit version of Windows), v86 mode is available and NTVDM is supported and works fine.
Interesting.. I've always heard that 64-bit x86 processors aren't able to run 16-bit DOS apps, hence the occasional question about DOS doors failing to run on BBSes running in 64-bit Windows.
Re: Re: New door bundle, Ambr
By: Digital Man to Nightfox on Wed Jul 10 2019 06:13 pm
If you booted the processer into "real mode", it certainly could run 16-bit software. But that's it. You can't run any 32-bit or 64-bit software in "real mode".
Ah, I didn't know that. And it's been a long time since I read about the different x86 processor modes.
Running DOS in emulator is different than running DOS in real mode. There's another x86 mode called virtual 86 mode: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_8086_mode
x64 processors running in 64-bit mode not support virtual 86 mode. That's the issue. So if you run an x64 processor in 32-bit (e.g. running a 32-bit version of Windows), v86 mode is available and NTVDM is supported and works fine.
Ah, interesting.
I think it's interesting that Intel and AMD have supported things like this (at least in 32-bit mode) for as long as they have.
Nobody really mentions
these things when they talk about their latest processor anymore, but I suppose if they were to remove some of these legacy features, they'd have a smaller CPU die, which I suppose may (or may not) reduce power consumption & heat production a little bit.
Re: Re: New door bundle, Ambr
By: Nightfox to Digital Man on Wed Jul 10 2019 05:22 pm
Interesting.. I've always heard that 64-bit x86 processors aren't able to run 16-bit DOS apps, hence the occasional question about DOS doors failing to run on BBSes running in 64-bit Windows.
it's not the processor, it's the OS. 64 bit Windows OSes don't have the DOSVDM subsystem that allows 32-bit Windows to run 16-bit apps.
No, 64 bit processors that (AMD64) support all of the modes that the 32 bit ISA supports, in addition to the 64 bit modes. That's why you can run 16 bit apps under 32 bit Windows on a 64 bit processor, just like you can on a 32 bit processor. It's only when in 64 bit mode that 16 bit apps aren't supported (without some sort of VM or emulation).
Interesting.. I've always heard that 64-bit x86 processors aren't
able to run 16-bit DOS apps, hence the occasional question about DOS
doors failing to run on BBSes running in 64-bit Windows.
it's not the processor, it's the OS. 64 bit Windows OSes don't have the DOSVDM subsystem that allows 32-bit Windows to run 16-bit apps.
Nobody really mentions
these things when they talk about their latest processor anymore, but
I suppose if they were to remove some of these legacy features, they'd
have a smaller CPU die, which I suppose may (or may not) reduce power
consumption & heat production a little bit.
So little, it's like nothing/free to include it. All the other enhancements and caches, etc. that have been added to x86 CPUs over the years dwarf the little "real mode" x86 instructions/mode buried in there. No harm leaving it there for those few that do need it.
On 07-10-19 17:22, Nightfox wrote to Digital Man <=-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64
Interesting.. I've always heard that 64-bit x86 processors aren't able
to run 16-bit DOS apps, hence the occasional question about DOS doors failing to run on BBSes running in 64-bit Windows. I knew 64-bit
Windows doesn't have the 16-bit DOS subsystem, and I thought that was because a 64-bit processor lacks support for 16-bit software, but
perhaps that's not true? Come to think of it, my BBS machine is
running a 64-bit Linux, and is running a 32-it Windows in a VM, and the 32-bit Windows is able to run DOS doors even though the host processor
is a 64-bit processor..
You're confusing 64 bit processors with 64 bit OSs. 64 bit processors can run anything from DOS to the latest 64 bit OSs designed to run on the Intel/AMD architecture. However, 64 bit OSs can't run 16 bit software without some assitance, because the processor doesn't support 16 bit real mode code, when in 64 bit "long mode".
However, booting a 32 bit OS on a 64 bit processor can run 16 bit apps, because the processor is running in the same 32 bit protected mode or virtual 808s mode, same as any processot since the 80386.
| Sysop: | MCMLXXIX |
|---|---|
| Location: | Prospect, CT |
| Users: | 333 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 17:30:01 |
| Calls: | 574 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Messages: | 235855 |