Now that I look it up, the domain was first registered over 3 years ago in April 2006, and I recall he said something in IRC not long after registering it. My memory sure is failing me these days ... :-)

Your point here is well taken, and should be considered more deeply. Slackware64 is "Pure 64" in name only. Pure 64-bit systems don't have */lib64, as you have correctly stated. So this really still comes down to an incomplete solution. For so much to have been made about Slackware64 not being multilib, reminds me of all the comments constantly repeated on IRC (freenode) that Slackware is not 64-bit, any time any question was raised about it.

Well, the reality now is that Slackware is 64-bit, and Slackware64 will likely end up being multilib. Simply because there is no realistic alternative to not doing so.

The Emperor has new clothes!
Shingoshi

Did you mean disingenuous?

Yes! I knew as I was typing it, that it wasn't right. I tried using my desktop dictionary, but it doesn't give suggestions to correct your mistakes. But I definitely looked first. Yeah. I could have simply typed into Google's search box, and it would have told me what I needed to know. Actually, I just tried that, and it doesn't work immediately. I would have had to load the search page itself. Like so many other things, I would like nothing more than to be able to expand on my options to know what's real.

Shingoshi

I like having and using dictionaries.
http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/532...ingdesktop.jpg

Yay :-)
This really made my day.

Many thanks to the Slackware team.

Whilst all this discussion is fascinating, it is at best meaningless and at worst puerile. What the average Slackware user wishes to know is how he or she will be able to run 32bit programs such as wine.

samac

Slackware64 will not run 32-bit applications. Wine or anything else for that matter.
You will have to either load Slamd64 compatibility libraries, or build them yourself. Which would you like to do?

Shingoshi

Well, since Slackware64 is currently in testing only, I would be willing to bet that the answer to this question will not be answered at this time. Either stick with 32-bit Slackware until 13.0 is released, or stick with 64-current without attempting to butcher your system with 32-bit compatibility (or try, but don't complain). I'm sure there will at least be a one-liner with advice on the subject in CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT or some such file when 13.0 is actually released; however, since slack64 is still in -current stage only, I don't see the need for this complaint. They have made it multilib-compatible by keeping 64-bit libs in /usr/lib64, which tells you that it may be possible in the future to add 32-bit compatibility (though they are not making promises). Heck, even if they don't give advice, I'm sure *someone* would make a guide with all of the needed 32-bit packages.

I am waiting until slackware64 is actually released before making uninformed, hairbrained conclusions. But that's just me.

Just read the comments from Pat. He didn't want to create a multilib system. Instead, he claims it's multilib-ready. That's kind of like a woman who touts being a virgin, but carries a box of condoms around with her. Multilib-ready? Is that kind of like, 'I'm abstaining from sex, until I decided to have it.

I'm glad we're all ready!
Shingoshi

That's what everybody has been saying!! It does not have the 32 bit libraries but will provide the capability for users to add them. Sheesh.

Edit: and I am quite sure that, if it turns out these libraries are not part of the *final* Slackware64, then third-parties (like a contributor to SlackBuilds.org, perhaps) will make them available.

Seriously, I think this multilib stuff is no cause for such discussion, especially during the development stage when things can change any time.

Amen.

With that in mind, generally speaking, what can or can't one do with a pure 64-bit version of Slackware? For instance, can Madwifi drivers be compiled for 64-bit? How about Frozen Bubble and OpenOffice? Will Kaffeine and Mplayer work? I suspect that Scribus and QGIS may take some work to get running; it will be fun to find out.

To put it more simply, how much of a problem/advantage is it to run a 64-bit version of Slackware from a practical point of view? How hard is it to compile packages not included with the base system?

Regards,

-Drew

Mmm, there seems to be some sort of communication problem here...

brilliant news, thanks to the slackware team and fred for providing 64 bit slackware, would be interesting to see some comparison of slackware64 and slamd64 - could there be any difference? anyway as a gnome user I'm gonna be waiting for a good 64bit gsb before diving in.

There's a slamd64 openoffice 64-bit slackbuild script that allegedly works. MPlayer is now in /extra (see AlienBOB's post further up for more info on that). No idea about Madwifi, Kaffeine or Frozen Bubble.

Like you say - it's all a bit of an adventure from now on!

Because given the number of comments made here already, showing the assumption that Slackware64 is multilib, there will be an even larger number of users who will make the same mistake in assuming 32-bit compatibility. And if Slackware64-13 is released (as in no longer -current), and still doesn't have the 32-bit compatibility layer, many of those users will attempt to upgrade their systems, only to find out they're screwed. And being multilib-ready won't matter to them either.

So the backlash will likely drive some of them to Slamd64 (multilib), when they would not have done so otherwise.

Shingoshi