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.
But as always, every user is allowed their own choice.

Shingoshi

Speaking of predictions:

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

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...65#post3548265

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?

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

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.
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

Except you're wrong.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hi,
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.