SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I think it was a wise decision to make it multilib, in fact I think it's absolutely necessary as a step in the transition to 64-bit. Currently, not every software is available in 64-bit, one of the major ones is wine, and many people need it and other such programs. Going purelib is a radical decision that should only be made some time from now when 32-bit goes the way of 16-bit and 8-bit that came before.
Slackware64 is not multilib. That's what all the heat is that I'm taking for this. It will allow users to ADD 32-bit compatibility. But it is not immediately provided. But taking your comment (in the absence of that compatibility), everything I've said is justified. Going purelib is exactly what Slackware64 has done!
In order for Slackware users to install Slackware64, and still be able to use their existing 32-bit applications, those users still have to rely on Slamd64 to make that possible. That's about as funny as this can get. And it will be even funnier when others speak up and say that each user doesn't have to employ Slamd64 as a solution. Because the fact is, that will require an even greater effort to build those packages, than simply installing the applications from Slamd64. Oh, the majesty of it all!
Being absolutely brand new to the whole 64-bit world of computing, I have a basic question: what are the issues regarding being a pure lib 64-bit system vs. multi-lib?
Put another way, what can and can't one do (or which software won't run) with one versus the other?
Being absolutely brand new to the whole 64-bit world of computing, I have a basic question: what are the issues regarding being a pure lib 64-bit system vs. multi-lib?
Put another way, what can and can't one do (or which software won't run) with one versus the other?
Thanks,
-Drew
Slackware64 does not have the libraries|packages required to allow any user to run 32-bit packages. You will have to provide them yourself!
I think it speaks for itself. A pure 64-bit OS means that no 32-bit programs will run, or they might run (well, unlikely actually), because of 32 libs, that are not available. The whole purpose of multi lib is to be able to run certain apps and plugins that are just not available for 64-bit, e.g flash. I am under the impression that Slackware64 is multi lib, even though Pat never really stated what kind of 64-bit Slackware would be, either multi lib or pure 64.
Let me repeat myself. Slackware64 is NOT multilib! It was the one point PatV chose to exclude, as has been repeatedly stated by others. There is NO compatibility between Slackware and Slackware64. You simply cannot install and run Slackware applications on Slackware64 as it is currently released. They are essentially two separate and distinct distributions, sharing nothing in common except the creators.
Let me repeat myself. Slackware64 is NOT multilib!
Slackware64 is NOT released! It's still in -current stage.
Quote:
It was the one point PatV chose to exclude, as has been repeatedly stated by others. There is NO compatibility between Slackware and Slackware64. You simply cannot run Slackware applications on Slackware64 as it is currently released. They are essentially two separate and distinct distributions, sharing nothing in common except the creators.
You can't run arm binaries on OpenBSD's i386 version, or x86_64 binaries on OpenBSD's armel version, or i386 binaries on OpenBSD's sparc version. They're STILL all OpenBSD. Once again, you're talking about something that you obviously don't understand.
Whether Slackware64 will ever have any 32bit compatibility support is something that I honestly don't know at this point. The *possibility* is certainly there - that much is clear.
If it does happen, it's quite obvious that someone in this thread will take credit for making it happen due to his insight in the matter, but I'll leave that conclusion in the hands of the readers...
Correct me if I'm wrong here, because you know so much more than I do. Is there anything else required other than selecting multilib in the configuration of the toolchain packages to allow the use of 32-bit applications. Just think of all that work those poor folks have had to do to keep using 32-bit applications on a 64-bit system. If they had only been enlightened, and chose not to do so. All that work because of one needless configuration option.
Whether Slackware64 will ever have any 32bit compatibility support is something that I honestly don't know at this point. The *possibility* is certainly there - that much is clear.
If it does happen, it's quite obvious that someone in this thread will take credit for making it happen due to his insight in the matter, but I'll leave that conclusion in the hands of the readers...
ROFLMAO!! That was precious. Great sense of humor on your part. I'll try and restrain myself...
I think I understand now, but then slackware64 is not a standard purelib either, if it were purelib it would have only /usr/lib and not /usr/lib64. Either way I hope that 32-bit compatibility is maintained in some way, otherwise it just doesn't make sense. Either way we'll see what happens, so far it is not released yet.
Resistance is futile, your individuality will be assimulated...
Well not exactly!!
Let's get real about this. If anyone is going to use Bluewhite64 as an example of a working "Pure 64" distribution, what was the point in reinventing the wheel? Someone more enlightened than I am can explain, "what are the conceptual/philosophical differences between each of them in Slackware64's current form?
What do you know, the Borg have rejects!
Shingoshi
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
