LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Bluewhite64
User Name
Password
Bluewhite64 This forum is for the discussion of Bluewhite64 Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 05-31-2009, 06:05 PM   #31
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenjiro_Tanaka View Post
Xavier, wouldn't it be better if Patrick would have accepted Fred (Slamd64) and Arny's (Bluewhite64) help to start making a 64bit version of slackware YEARS ago? As far as I remember BW64 is around since 2006.

I don't see it as a "nice route" to just "step away" WHEN slackware-64 (or whatever it will be called) shows up.
And some have taken notice of this " Slackware64 -current made public!" statement (from http://www.slackware.com) and it's implications:
Quote:
We'd like to thank the unofficial 64 bit projects for taking up the slack for us for so long so that we could take our time getting everything just right. Without those alternatives, we would have been pressured to get things out before they were really ready.
I've used Slackware since about 2000. And as soon as 64-bit came to maturity, I immediately started advocating for it. Slackware wanted no part of it. And it didn't really matter which solution you chose. Bluewhite64 or Slamd64. Neither was accepted as valid. And now comes the statement above. And to prove just how deeply this mindset is entrenched in Slackware culture, have a look at these links.

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...72#post3548772
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...76#post3558376

And just for some background here. I was one of the few (if not the only one) who updated a running Slackware 32-bit system to Slamd64. So I do have the credentials to speak about this. And now, I've done the same thing again, by using Bluewhite64 ia32-packages installed before the update to Slackware64 was started. Read my posts carefully. I think you will see why no one should ever consider Bluewhite64 acquiescing to the dictates of Slackware. The other mentioned project has chosen to do that. Actually now rebuilding packages for Slackware64 to provide solutions for the condition that existed before. Slackware64 is now moving to being a multilib system. Exactly the opposite of what Pat said he would do.

Shingoshi
 
Old 05-31-2009, 06:09 PM   #32
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by kr4ey View Post
If Pat will ever release a 64 bit Slackware I hope Bluewhite64 is not the only one that steps aside. Slamd64 should too (they are no different). It would be very unfair for only one to step aside, and not both.
After using both for a long time I feel Bluewhite64 is much easier to work with and way more up to date.
It is the very notion of not being "up to date" that so many Slackware users take pride in. And that will not likely change, unless others goad them into it.

Shingoshi
 
Old 05-31-2009, 06:29 PM   #33
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34
When reality hits the fan!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by kenjiro View Post
Slamd64 works one way (with multilib, etc), BW64 works another way (pure 64bit). So I guess, just guess, the so called slack64 will have to chose one of these two approaches, right? Instead of a "step away" there could be a "welcome to the team" from slackware to bw64/slamd64, don't you think?

Perhaps all this discussion is a huge waste of time for all of us.
Well. Here it is May of 2009, and Slackware64 was announced. And guess what. Pat chose to follow the example of Bluewhite64 (pure64), not Slamd64 (multilib). That is, until I started making roast of the decision. Now, the creator of Slamd64 has decided to rebuild packages for Slackware64, providing the very solution I said should have existed from the beginning.

And I'm in complete agreement that this has been a BIG waste of time. So many manhours were wasted, repeating what had already been done before. And I don't care what anyone says, that was a nonproductive decision. In the end, we have (in Slackware64) what was meant to be a Bluewhite64 (pure64), transitioned into becoming a Slamd64 (Multilib: with Slamd64's help I might add)!

Shingoshi

Last edited by Shingoshi; 05-31-2009 at 06:44 PM.
 
Old 06-01-2009, 06:37 AM   #34
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,238

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shingoshi View Post
Well. Here it is May of 2009, and Slackware64 was announced. And guess what. Pat chose to follow the example of Bluewhite64 (pure64), not Slamd64 (multilib). That is, until I started making roast of the decision. Now, the creator of Slamd64 has decided to rebuild packages for Slackware64, providing the very solution I said should have existed from the beginning.

And I'm in complete agreement that this has been a BIG waste of time. So many manhours were wasted, repeating what had already been done before. And I don't care what anyone says, that was a nonproductive decision. In the end, we have (in Slackware64) what was meant to be a Bluewhite64 (pure64), transitioned into becoming a Slamd64 (Multilib: with Slamd64's help I might add)!

Shingoshi
Once more, the release announcement of Slackware64 states nothing about being pure-64bit. And the ones that further explained the status of slackware64-current (like me) only indicated that "slackware64-current for now only has 64bit binaries". The simple reason being that we also have the old 32bit slackware-current from which you can just extract 32bit slackware libraries and dump them into Slackware64 - overwriting no Slackware64 libraries!

The same holds true for all the 32bit proprietary software that people want to run and why they need these 32bit compatibility libraries - binary-distributed 32bit software usually installs its libraries in /usr/lib . I think that makes Slackware64 more compatible with what's out there.

And what is wrong with Fred Emmott creating compat-32 packages for Slackware64?

As you say, it has been a waste of time trying to discuss with you. I hope you find peace in Bluewhite64 and leave the rest of the world alone.

Eric
 
Old 06-01-2009, 07:11 AM   #35
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34
The comments that I referred to, were made in an interview with Pat. According to that interview, he never intended to release a multilib system. I remember reading the comments myself. So a revision of history is always welcomed.

Maybe this will give anyone who reads this some perspective about how well things are working:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...39#post3558839
Read the posts above and below, and consider the results.
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...68#post3558868

The real question is why is there such disrespect for the work of others outside of the official Slackware community? As though Slackware represents "the rest of the world!

You can have a work in progress, or get your work done!
Just be happy with your choice.
Shingoshi

Last edited by Shingoshi; 06-01-2009 at 07:19 AM.
 
Old 06-01-2009, 07:41 AM   #36
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,238

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shingoshi View Post
The comments that I referred to, were made in an interview with Pat. According to that interview, he never intended to release a multilib system. I remember reading the comments myself. So a revision of history is always welcomed.
Please post this interview's literal un-abbreviated text here, and indicate where Pat said that Slackware will never be multilib. Proof is better than FUD.

Quote:
The real question is why is there such disrespect for the work of others outside of the official Slackware community? As though Slackware represents "the rest of the world!
Since there are multiple 64bit derivatives of Slackware, all derived from Slamd64, which in turn was derived from Slackware itself, it would have been awkward to pick one of these derivatives, and stamp "official Slackware64" on them.

Instead, Slackware64 is a clean-room build from scratch with 32bit Slackware as the foundation, with the primary goal of re-writing all of Slackware's SlackBuilds so that they can produce packages for the 32bit as well as the 64bit release, keeping in mind that ARM and s/390 may brought in sync soon.
As such it is a work in progress, with apparent and obvious, and likely not-so-obvious bugs as well. There is no stable release of it yet, and by installing it on your machines, you are regarded as a beta tester and expected to report the bugs you find. Not to try and slander the work and it's creators.

It is still undecided if Slackware will be 64bit pure or be fully multilib if it ships. But the many posts in this forum are a clear indication that it is not hard to add 32bit subsystem yourself. This is Slackware remember? It is customizable and will not get in your way, as long as you know what you are doing.

And finally - no, Slackware64 did not take the "Bluewhite64 route". Bluewhite64 advertized itself as true 64bit and therefore being a better 64bit Slackware derivative (this was the reason for taking Slamd64 as a template and ripping out the multilib). Then it's creator found out that people wanted multilib and instead of keeping to it's design principles, an awkward "ia32 emulation" was added on top.
Slackware64 ships 64bit packages only at this moment, because unlike Bluewhite64 (and Slamd64) Slackware is a full 32bit distribution as well as a 64bit distribution. You can simply get your 32bit stuff from Slackware. Remember this is a work in progress - you are expected to do your homework if you want stuff that is absent at the moment.

Shouting "I was the first, see!" in all these LQ threads does not make your star shine any brighter. More people work this out on their own and do not make such a fuss out of it in public. There was a good reason you were banned from LQ in the past week. Looking at this very thread, you are trying to make up for your week of confinement. Don't. You've made your point, people read all about it, and we all moved on.

Eric
 
Old 06-01-2009, 07:43 AM   #37
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Lubuntu
Posts: 19,176
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 430Reputation: 430Reputation: 430Reputation: 430Reputation: 430
Firstly, Slack64 is not released. It is still in testing. No project will have all bugs and issues ironed out on an early beta - this is why there are threads. They will find the issues and the Slackware team will fix them. It's really not a difficult thing to understand, I don't know why you are harping on as if this is a failed mature project.

Secondly, if Pat has said that he won't go 64 bit and then does, well, Pat is a human being and is allowed to change his mind. This is a distro, not a decision to go to war.

Really, if you are unhappy with the progress on Slack64 the best way to fix it is to do something about it. Plug the holes, report the bugs (and the fixes). Otherwise, stop sniping and chill out.
 
Old 06-01-2009, 12:57 PM   #38
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34
The issue is stop putting down everything else that isn't Slackware.

Shingoshi
 
Old 06-01-2009, 01:26 PM   #39
sahko
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2008
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,041

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I remember Pat's interview Shingoshi is referring to.
Its the Linux Tech Show one available here: http://tllts.org/mirror.php?fname=tl...4-10-25-06.mp3
I just listened to the 64bit part again (on 48:00 in case anyones interested) and Pat says at some point: "...and if i do that (a 64 bit port) im not thinking that im gonna be doing a multilib type of support where you can run both 64bit and 32bit but i will probably do a full pure 64 bit, but many stuff are not available on 64 bits yet. Stuff like java etc." in more words. He goes on for 4 mins.

To be honest i was a bit dissapointed by using lib64 and being multilib cause i had the interview in my mind too, but in essence, Pat didnt do the port. Alien Bob did, at least judging from the announcement.
 
Old 06-01-2009, 01:43 PM   #40
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Rep: Reputation: 34
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROXR View Post
Many many thanks, your solution really work, now I can execute my binaries without problems.

Greatings
Thank you for the acknowledgment. I hope that this will be helpful to others as well. Pass the word around. There is a working solution. Even if it's not the one many would expect or desire.
http://mirror.inode.at/data/bluewhit...a32-emulation/
It pays to do what works. Because if you're not working, you won't get paid!!

Shingoshi

Last edited by Shingoshi; 06-01-2009 at 01:53 PM.
 
Old 06-01-2009, 02:57 PM   #41
titopoquito
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Ruhr Area, Germany
Distribution: Slackware64 14.0
Posts: 1,517

Rep: Reputation: 90
Shingoshi, please fulfill your own signature and "advance your mind". Again and again citing yourself, desperately playing a victim of the ah so bad Slackware team and the rebel that will save all from the Slackware team's totalitarism is childish and annoying.
 
  


Reply

Tags
bluewhite64, slackware


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
KDE 4.1 for Bluewhite64 12.1 arny Bluewhite64 2 08-23-2008 01:01 PM
Bluewhite64 12.1 is Released arny Bluewhite64 5 06-12-2008 12:43 PM
Bluewhite64 12.1-rc1 arny Bluewhite64 0 04-03-2008 03:08 PM
Bluewhite64 12.0 released! BW64User Slackware 14 08-17-2007 01:08 PM
Slamd64 vs BlueWhite64 drewhead Slackware 4 10-06-2006 04:31 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration