LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 05-31-2009, 06:29 PM   #16
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 34
A matter of reflection...


It could be noted, that before any of my original posts about a means for running 32-bit applications on Slackware64, there was no solution. It was only after I first mentioned using Slamd64 32-bit compatibility packages, and having that initially discouraged, that NEW packages were then created to allow 32-bit binaries to run on Slackware64. First came the multilib rebuild of gcc for Slackware64. And now comes the 32-bit compatibility packages rebuilt (by the same author) against Slackware64. Neither of these facts existed before I said anything about them. And it seems they were only created in response.
Quote:
The major difference between these two sets of packages, is where they are placed on disk.
Bluewhite64: /lib32 & /usr/lib32
Slackware64: /lib & /usr/lib

The difference is the absolute security that nothing can ever overwrite your 32-bit libraries. NEVER!! This is important if you ever compile your own packages, and for any reason the suffix for lib64 is not explicitly stated. If that ever happens, you will be out of luck. It's just like having your 32-bit libraries in a sandbox.
But as always, every user is allowed their own choice.

Shingoshi
 
Old 05-31-2009, 06:52 PM   #17
rworkman
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Tuscaloosa, Alabama (USA)
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,945

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shingoshi View Post
It could be noted, that before any of my original posts about a means for running 32-bit applications on Slackware64, there was no solution. It was only after I first mentioned using Slamd64 32-bit compatibility packages, and having that initially discouraged, that NEW packages were then created to allow 32-bit binaries to run on Slackware64. First came the multilib rebuild of gcc for Slackware64. And now comes the 32-bit compatibility packages rebuilt (by the same author) against Slackware64. Neither of these facts existed before I said anything about them. And it seems they were only created in response.
Speaking of predictions:

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...60#post3547660

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...65#post3548265
 
Old 06-01-2009, 09:29 AM   #18
Martinezio
Member
 
Registered: May 2009
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Distribution: Slackware64-current
Posts: 191

Rep: Reputation: 32
So, what's the final path to _proper_ distro-upgrade?

I have currently downloaded a dvd iso-image built on May the 26th by slackware.no team...

I have some software built for my own way from sources and I want them working... Should I or not install those 32-bit compat pack?
 
Old 06-01-2009, 10:03 AM   #19
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,383

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
First off: the http://slackware.no team is not affiliated with Slackware. Their ISO images are unofficial.

Second: Slackware64 has no official release yet - it is available as "slackware64-current" meaning it is a development tree. If you want to use a -current tree of Slackware, you are regarded as a beta tester, and you are expected to find your way around any breakage (of course, there are many helpful people here on LQ and the ##slackware IRC channel at Freenode when things do break). Only an upgrade between two adjacent official release versions is supported with official documentation on the DVD/CDROM (UPGRADE.TXT and CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT).

Having said all that, you'll find that slackpkg (contained in Slackware's "AP/" series) is very well capable of upgrading Slackware for you. You will have to read its documentation before you attempt this! It is a largely automated process but you remain in control and have to make several important decisions in the course of the upgrade.

My advice is to upgrade to the most recent version of slackpkg before using it.

Eric
 
Old 06-01-2009, 02:19 PM   #20
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 34
The best solution is the one that works...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martinezio View Post
So, what's the final path to _proper_ distro-upgrade?

I have currently downloaded a dvd iso-image built on May the 26th by slackware.no team...

I have some software built for my own way from sources and I want them working... Should I or not install those 32-bit compat pack?
If you attempt to install any packages (except the 64-bit kernel) without having installed the ia32 compatibility layer, your system will become unusable, and will NOT complete the upgrade. You absolutely must install the ia32 compatibility packages to upgrade a running system without any problems. Glibc is the most important package of all. You must have a 32-bit replacement for it during an upgrade to 64-bit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROXR View Post
I installed the anorien.warwick.ac.uk 32 bits library, but applications return an error of "Segmentation fault"

May be some advance with the Bluewhite64 32 bits librarys ?

thanks
If you install these packages (http://mirror.inode.at/data/bluewhit...a32-emulation/), and you don't like them, you can always remove them. I think the reason why the above user may have had trouble, is precisely because he installed the Slamd64 packages which go in /lib and /usr/lib. You simply cannot do that to your running glibc, since it will likely overwrite it. You can only install the Slamd64 packages AFTER the system has already been successfully upgraded. The Bluewhite64 packages can and should be installed to a running Slackware system, WITHOUT any chance of anything being corrupted in the process.

I personally have suggested the use of the Bluewhite64 ia32 packages. Some are strongly opposed to doing so. But as I've stated in my posts, I've had no problems with the Bluewhite64 packages. I've performed live upgrades of two separate systems using them. All of my 32-bit packages that can still find the libraries they were built against, still work. There are a few which I have personally built, like the tools for my Logitech G15 keyboard which needs to be updated. But for the most part, everything is as it should be.

Find a solution that works and keep it.
Shingoshi

Last edited by Shingoshi; 06-01-2009 at 02:24 PM.
 
Old 06-01-2009, 04:29 PM   #21
rworkman
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Tuscaloosa, Alabama (USA)
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,945

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shingoshi View Post
If you attempt to install any packages (except the 64-bit kernel) without having installed the ia32 compatibility layer, your system will become unusable, and will NOT complete the upgrade. You absolutely must install the ia32 compatibility packages to upgrade a running system without any problems.
Except you're wrong.
 
Old 06-01-2009, 04:31 PM   #22
rworkman
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Tuscaloosa, Alabama (USA)
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,945

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
As the primary author of CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT, let me assure everyone that we WILL have upgrade instructions.
I can also assure you that the reason is not because Shingoshi has suggested that they are needed.
 
Old 06-01-2009, 04:45 PM   #23
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 34
It may be safe to install any packages other than the 64-bit glibc without having replacements for those packages in place. But I don't see any point in advising anyone to take any course of action that may leave them with the possibility of forgetting to install the 32-bit replacement glibc. Only to have them wondering why they don't have use of their 32-bit packages.

And it should be noted for anyone reading this thread, what the results have been with using any packages other than Bluewhite64's ia32 compatibility layer.As I've stated. Anyone is free to do anything they want. They are also free to live with the consequences of their choice.

If it doesn't work, it can't be right.
Shingoshi
 
Old 06-01-2009, 05:04 PM   #24
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,383

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shingoshi View Post
They are also free to live with the consequences of their choice.

If it doesn't work, it can't be right.
Shingoshi
So very to the point, this.

Apparently you do not live up to your own dogma Shingoshi. Why else all these posts where you try to put the blame for your failures with others?

Eric
 
Old 06-01-2009, 05:44 PM   #25
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 34
Interesting! My 32-bit packages work just fine! If they weren't, I wouldn't have been able to type in this forum, using Firefox in Wine.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1pre) Gecko/20090601 Shiretoko/3.5pre - Build ID: 20090601044045

Thanks to Bluewhite64...
Shingoshi

Last edited by Shingoshi; 06-01-2009 at 05:46 PM.
 
Old 06-01-2009, 06:31 PM   #26
Shingoshi
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cochise County, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo-AMD64 / Slackware64-Current
Posts: 474
Blog Entries: 28

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 34
This needs to be explicitly stated. There can be NO OFFICIAL statement made to encourage or discourage any person from using ANY set of tools to provide 32-bit compatibility in Slackware64, until Slackware64 has been OFFICIALLY released. And in the event that Slackware64 is released without it's own 32-bit compatibility layer, there can still be NO OFFICIAL statement made about any set of packages any user chooses to use. The fact that someone has (re)built packages based on Slamd64, still doesn't give them OFFICIAL status.

User Be Aware.
Shingoshi

Last edited by Shingoshi; 06-01-2009 at 06:35 PM.
 
Old 06-01-2009, 06:57 PM   #27
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,135
Blog Entries: 52

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
What does Shingoshi mean? I'm guessing something like "opinionated bore", but I could be wrong.
 
Old 06-01-2009, 07:20 PM   #28
titopoquito
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Ruhr Area, Germany
Distribution: Slackware64 14.0
Posts: 1,525

Rep: Reputation: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianL View Post
What does Shingoshi mean? I'm guessing something like "opinionated bore", but I could be wrong.
You don't really think there is ANY reasonable amount of words to explain what Shingoshi's OFFICIAL message here is? Since he is not able to explain himself in two or three (dozen) posts, who else should? LIKELY no one
 
Old 06-01-2009, 07:22 PM   #29
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,383

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I've never made any official statements. Simply because I have no official status. But I can voice my opinion about the wisdom of certain actions. There is nothing more to it, really.

Eric
 
Old 06-01-2009, 07:24 PM   #30
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: SlackwareŽ
Posts: 11,450
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505
Hi,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shingoshi View Post
This needs to be explicitly stated. There can be NO OFFICIAL statement made to encourage or discourage any person from using ANY set of tools to provide 32-bit compatibility in Slackware64, until Slackware64 has been OFFICIALLY released. And in the event that Slackware64 is released without it's own 32-bit compatibility layer, there can still be NO OFFICIAL statement made about any set of packages any user chooses to use. The fact that someone has (re)built packages based on Slamd64, still doesn't give them OFFICIAL status.

User Be Aware.
Shingoshi
Why do you keep trying to p^ss up a rope? People are free to do what they want with their systems. Either run a pure 64 or break it.

Your continued tirade is getting absurd. There's nothing wrong with you attempting to break your system but to encourage others to attempt things on a'-current' system is irresponsible.

Your open disclosure should include coverage for your suggestions.

Be it official or a '-current' OS, your argument is moot. I'm being polite since I don't want anything rubbing off from you.

I see no reason for you too stop your experimentation but please don't degrade others for not feeling the same. Go ahead and do what you want but remember this is still a '-current'. So why create more problems by creating a sickly system by your methods.
 
  


Reply


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 Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Slackware64-Current / slackpkg slackass Slackware 31 06-06-2009 11:51 PM
All the steps required for building a functional Gentoo stage4 from scratch. Shingoshi Linux - Distributions 8 05-10-2008 12:22 PM
Trying to install Slackware on my system, not getting far, need help with steps dave247 Slackware 3 06-15-2007 02:12 PM
basic steps for upgrading from 9.1 - 10.0? varese Suse/Novell 3 11-20-2005 08:25 PM
general instalation steps of slackware on raid/raid0 comp_ Slackware - Installation 1 02-07-2004 12:02 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:33 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
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