64 bit Slackware

cwizardone · 12-06-2008, 06:44 AM

I know this is going to sound factitious, but it is not, it is a serious question, and that is:
I'm 61 years old. Will I see an official 64 bit version of Slackware in my lifetime?
Thanks.

H_TeXMeX_H · 12-06-2008, 07:03 AM

It's possible. You probably already know about slamd64 the unofficial 64-bit slackware. You know, I've been using it for quite some time, and I've noticed no difference between it and slackware, really it's just a re-compiled slackware using the slackbuilds. It's up to Pat V to grant it "official" status.

sahko · 12-06-2008, 07:22 AM

If you tell us where you live we can calculate depending on the average lifetime for people in your country.

The only reason i would like a 64 bit version is that Slackware today supports ancient machines i aint got none of

cwizardone · 12-06-2008, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H

It's possible. You probably already know about slamd64 the unofficial 64-bit slackware. You know, I've been using it for quite some time, and I've noticed no difference between it and slackware, really it's just a re-compiled slackware using the slackbuilds. It's up to Pat V to grant it "official" status.

Thanks for the reply. I've been reading the information over at the Slamd64 web site and the Forum, and think I'll give it a try. Have you had any trouble finding 64 bit applications for Slamd64, or do you compile your own, or just install the 32 bit versions?
I guess a 12.2 version is in the wind?

H_TeXMeX_H · 12-06-2008, 09:54 AM

I usually compile my own apps, but there exists the possibility to use Slackbuilds, pretty much any Slackbuild can be converted to compile a 64-bit version either manually or by using a python script.

slamd64 is multilib, so you can run and compile either 32-bit or 64-bit apps, but for each you need separate lib directories and thus separate libraries. It is NOT possible to link a 32-bit library to a 64-bit library and vice versa, thus all dependencies must be met respectively for each word size. You can also install packages from slackware in slamd64 as 32-bit libraries if you need to.

The only issue left to conquer is the need to use 32-bit FF to run java applets (there is a 64-bit flash plugin already), this will likely appear sometime next year as I hear. I don't run java applets to often, and they are already on the demise so I'm not bothered by it.

Unfortunately, it does take a while for Fred to push a slamd64 version at the same time as Pat V does a slackware version. It's usually late by a few weeks.

amani · 12-06-2008, 11:14 AM

Bluewhite64 linux is also a 64-bit Slackware. It is like slamd64

H_TeXMeX_H · 12-06-2008, 11:21 AM

bw64 is purelib not multilib last time I checked ... and once again I have a feeling another flame war will start on this subject if I say anything more about it

Jeebizz · 12-06-2008, 11:30 AM

Here's my

.

My notebook is a 64-bit notebook, yet I choose to run 32-bit Slackware. I don't notice any degradation of performance. As far as I'm concerned I'm not too interested yet in 64-bit. I have said this before and I will say it again here. At this time it is still the transition period between 32-bit and 64, and because of that most main stream software is pretty much still in 32-bit even though the CPUs are 64.

I am sure that when the time is right Pat will begin the transition from 32 to 64 bit, but I still see a few more years ahead of 32-bit left. Perhaps the question might be if he will maintain both versions, but thats highly unlikely. If Slackware does go 64, then perhaps the 32-bit version will be left up to the community for any further workings. Just like GNOME. I see no problem in this.

At the moment however it is just too soon, but again the suggestions have already been made if one wants a 64-bit system. Try Slamd64 or BlueWhite.

cwizardone · 12-12-2008, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H

I usually compile my own apps, but there exists the possibility to use Slackbuilds, pretty much any Slackbuild can be converted to compile a 64-bit version either manually..

Is is actually as easy a changing ARCH="I386" to ARCH="x86_64" ?

The question that is coming to mind is finding dependencies that are 64 bit. For example, I was reading that someone was having trouble running xine in Slamd64 and it was suggested that installing libdvdcss would solve that problem. As I doubt the 32 bit version would work with 64 bit xine (or would it?), where would one find a 64 bit version of libdvdcss?
If all one has to do is change the arch to x86_64 in a slackbuild script that wouldn't be a problem, but I can't believe it is that easy.

H_TeXMeX_H · 12-13-2008, 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cwizardone

Is is actually as easy a changing ARCH="I386" to ARCH="x86_64" ?

The question that is coming to mind is finding dependencies that are 64 bit. For example, I was reading that someone was having trouble running xine in Slamd64 and it was suggested that installing libdvdcss would solve that problem. As I doubt the 32 bit version would work with 64 bit xine (or would it?), where would one find a 64 bit version of libdvdcss?

Usually, that's all that needs to be done, sometimes you may also need a change of CFLAGS, and added --libdir=/usr/lib64

For libdvdcss, you'd have to compile it. But it's easy, it doesn't even have any dependencies, AFAIK.

cwizardone · 12-13-2008, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H

Usually, that's all that needs to be done, sometimes you may also need a change of CFLAGS, and added --libdir=/usr/lib64

For libdvdcss, you'd have to compile it. But it's easy, it doesn't even have any dependencies, AFAIK.

Would that be "add" the CFLAGS to --libdir=/usr/lib64, or "change" to --libdir=/usr/lib64

I've ran numerous slackbuilds scripts over the years, but I've never ran a script against a script, so please bear with me while I ask a dumb question.
Would it be correct to take the python script you were so kind as to provide above, cut and paste it to a text file, give it a name, save it, make it executable (chmod +x), and then run it against the slackbuild script? For example, at the prompt,

32to64script slackbuildscript

or would that be

./32to64script slackbuildscript

Then take the slackbuild script, make it executable and continue from there?
Many Thanks.

pixellany · 12-13-2008, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cwizardone

I'm 61 years old.

Child!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by sahko

The only reason i would like a 64 bit version is that Slackware today supports ancient machines i aint got none of

Huh???? 32-bit Linux supports both 32-bit and 64-bit hardware. Most people do not need 64-bits and should just install the 32-bit version.

I'm guessing that it is easier for the chip makers to have only one (64-bit) product line. The vendor of a computer pre-installed with an OS might want you to believe that 64-bits will make you life better, but the odds are it won't.

H_TeXMeX_H · 12-13-2008, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cwizardone

Would that be "add" the CFLAGS to --libdir=/usr/lib64, or "change" to --libdir=/usr/lib64

I've ran numerous slackbuilds scripts over the years, but I've never ran a script against a script, so please bear with me while I ask a dumb question.
Would it be correct to take the python script you were so kind as to provide above, cut and paste it to a text file, give it a name, save it, make it executable (chmod +x), and then run it against the slackbuild script? For example, at the prompt,

32to64script slackbuildscript

or would that be

./32to64script slackbuildscript

Then take the slackbuild script, make it executable and continue from there?
Many Thanks.

I mean when the slackbuild runs './configure' you may need to add '--libdir=/usr/lib64' to that configure statement.

To run the python script, you would do './sbo64.py mplayer.Slackbuild > mplayer.slamd64build'. Note, however, that there are 2 small errors in that python script, that main function should be:

Code:

def main(argv=None):
    if argv == None or len(argv) != 1:
        raise Exception("Invalid number of arguments")

    factory = BuildFactory()
    builder = factory.get_builder(get_slackbuild(os.getcwd(), argv[0]))

    print builder.convert()

cwizardone · 12-13-2008, 01:15 PM

Many Thanks H_TeXMeX_H.
Now I feel properly equipped for the task at hand.
As soon as Slamd64 12.2 hits the streets, it's lock and load.
Thanks, again.

BTW, I'm not a big fan of KDE 4.xx in its present form, but I do think it is a step in the right direction and I've read Fred and at least one of his crew are involved in the KDE 4.2 beta (maybe it is just one of his crew). So, with all that in mind, do you have any thoughts about where Slamd64 is headed in respect to KDE 4.xx, or is it just one of those "when it is ready, it is ready" sort of things?

I've read somewhere on this forum that PV is thinking of releasing a version of Slackware (for a fee?) with KDE 4.2. Sounds a bit out of character for PV, but, then, what do I know.

H_TeXMeX_H · 12-13-2008, 01:34 PM

I don't know, but I know Fred is a KDE dev, so he'll probably want to make it available as soon as he can. I'm also wondering when the next version of slamd64 will be ready ... from the last release it could be from weeks to months...

EDIT:
Note I contacted the author of that python script, it seems he has fixed it now, he said he had made the changes to fix this locally earlier but forgot to update this info to the server. So it's fixed now, no need to change it like I said anymore.