From 0d84af1cbb0dc825db3e965d5126e5b08f878067 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Bruce Dubbs Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 03:52:38 +0000 Subject: Typos and wording changes git-svn-id: http://svn.linuxfromscratch.org/LFS/trunk/BOOK@11343 4aa44e1e-78dd-0310-a6d2-fbcd4c07a689 --- prologue/architecture.xml | 11 ++++++++--- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'prologue/architecture.xml') diff --git a/prologue/architecture.xml b/prologue/architecture.xml index 1a7ad8ab5..a6a456c83 100644 --- a/prologue/architecture.xml +++ b/prologue/architecture.xml @@ -22,9 +22,9 @@ computer. Some other facts about 64-bit systems need to be added here. When compared to a 32-bit system, the sizes of executable programs are slightly -larger and the execution speeds are only slightly faster. For example, in a -test build of LFS-6.5 on a Core2Duo CPU based system, the following statistics -were measured: +larger and the execution speeds of arbitrary programs are only slightly faster. +For example, in a test build of LFS-6.5 on a Core2Duo CPU based system, the +following statistics were measured: Architecture Build Time Build Size 32-bit 198.5 minutes 648 MB @@ -35,6 +35,11 @@ the 32-bit build. The gain from going to a 64-bit system is relatively minimal. Of course, if you have more than 4GB of RAM or want to manipulate data that exceeds 4GB, the advantages of a 64-bit system are substantial. +The above discussion is only appropriate when comparing +builds on the same hardware. Modern 64-bit systems are considerably +faster than older 64-bit systems and the LFS authors recommend building +on a 64-bit system when given a choice. + The default 64-bit build that results from LFS is considered a "pure" 64-bit system. That is, it supports 64-bit executables only. Building a "multi-lib" system requires compiling many applications twice, once for a -- cgit v1.2.3-54-g00ecf