[gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Anand Buddhdev]

Hello fellow list members,

I'm getting a new AMD64-based computer, and I'd like to run gentoo on 
it. I have been doing a bit of reading about running linux on AMD64, and 
it seems that in general, it's not a problem. The main issues seem to be 
with firefox 32-bit plugins, and win32 codecs for use with mplayer. My 
reading seems to suggest that if I stick to firefox-bin and mplayer32, 
then I should be fine. However, I'd like to hear from people who're 
already using gentoo on amd64, and what their experience is. Is it 
simple to get these apps to work? Or was there a lot of frustration 
involved. I've used linux and BSD systems for a long time, so I'm used 
to hacking, and I'm not afraid to mess around with scripts and 
compilers. But I've reached a point when I'd just like to be able to 
install a system, and have it work. Fedora Core almost allows that, 
except that I'm a bit fed up of the multiple repository problems, and no 
proper way of picking and choosing what exactly I want. I could 
recompile some of the packages from SRPMS, and specify my choices. But I 
reckoned that if recompiling was the way to go, then I'd give gentoo a try.

One of the choices I'm facing is whether to install gentoo 64-bit, or 
32-bit. Installing 32-bit on the AMD64 would make life easy, but kind of 
defeats the purpose of having a 64-bit processor. Hence my request for 
opinions. Should I go 64-bit, or stay in the 32-bit world for now?

Regards, and thanks in advance.

Anand
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Mike Melanson]

Anand Buddhdev wrote:
> Hello fellow list members,
> 
> I'm getting a new AMD64-based computer, and I'd like to run gentoo on 
> it. I have been doing a bit of reading about running linux on AMD64, and 
> it seems that in general, it's not a problem. The main issues seem to be 
> with firefox 32-bit plugins, and win32 codecs for use with mplayer. My 
> reading seems to suggest that if I stick to firefox-bin and mplayer32, 
> then I should be fine. However, I'd like to hear from people who're 
> already using gentoo on amd64, and what their experience is. Is it 
> simple to get these apps to work? Or was there a lot of frustration 
> involved. I've used linux and BSD systems for a long time, so I'm used 
> to hacking, and I'm not afraid to mess around with scripts and 
> compilers. But I've reached a point when I'd just like to be able to 
> install a system, and have it work. Fedora Core almost allows that, 
> except that I'm a bit fed up of the multiple repository problems, and no 
> proper way of picking and choosing what exactly I want. I could 
> recompile some of the packages from SRPMS, and specify my choices. But I 
> reckoned that if recompiling was the way to go, then I'd give gentoo a try.
> 
> One of the choices I'm facing is whether to install gentoo 64-bit, or 
> 32-bit. Installing 32-bit on the AMD64 would make life easy, but kind of 
> defeats the purpose of having a 64-bit processor. Hence my request for 
> opinions. Should I go 64-bit, or stay in the 32-bit world for now?

	For most of what I have to do, 64-bit Gentoo works famously. Yes, the 
multimedia codec thing is a problem which is very near and dear to my 
heart (see my email address). The community is working hard on reverse 
engineering major codecs in order to mitigate this problem.

-- 
	-Mike Melanson
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Bob Sanders]

> Hello fellow list members,
> 
> The main issues seem to be 
> with firefox 32-bit plugins, and win32 codecs for use with mplayer. My 
> reading seems to suggest that if I stick to firefox-bin and mplayer32, 
> then I should be fine. However, I'd like to hear from people who're 
> already using gentoo on amd64, and what their experience is. Is it 
> simple to get these apps to work? 

You could go with the bins.  However, being lazy, I just switch to Opera
when I need to deal with Flash.  Realplayer...well, realplayer alwaays
found some way to break more than work for me.

Also, downloading the WinXX file and playing with Xine or GMplayer using
the win32codecs works in a lot of cases.  Not all.

> Fedora Core almost allows that, 
> except that I'm a bit fed up of the multiple repository problems, and no 
> proper way of picking and choosing what exactly I want. I could 
> recompile some of the packages from SRPMS, and specify my choices. But I 
> reckoned that if recompiling was the way to go, then I'd give gentoo a try.
>

Don't count on SRPMS actually producing a working package on your system.
They compile great in the dedicated build environment, most times.  But
on the average system, something will go wrong.  A clean chroot environment
and a complete set of packages will be needed - essentially, a duplicate
of the typical build environment. 

> One of the choices I'm facing is whether to install gentoo 64-bit, or 
> 32-bit. Installing 32-bit on the AMD64 would make life easy, but kind of 
> defeats the purpose of having a 64-bit processor. Hence my request for 
> opinions. Should I go 64-bit, or stay in the 32-bit world for now?
>

Just go with 64bit.  Sure you'll have some problems.  Most issues with
32-bit games remain.  Multimedia works well - haven't played with Realplayer
in awhile, but most quicktime seems to work, as does firewire and usb audio.
DVDs and SVCDs all play, firewire deck control and video capture work.
Ogg work fine.  No problems with audio - Alsa works.  OpenAL works
for Ut2004.

Bob 
-  
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Zac Medico]

Anand Buddhdev wrote:
> One of the choices I'm facing is whether to install gentoo 64-bit, or
> 32-bit. Installing 32-bit on the AMD64 would make life easy, but kind of
> defeats the purpose of having a 64-bit processor. Hence my request for
> opinions. Should I go 64-bit, or stay in the 32-bit world for now?
> 

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/technotes/index.xml?part=1&chap=4

Why not do both?  If IA32 Emulation is enabled in your kernel config the you can use both 32-bit and 64-bit userlands and chroot from one to the other when necessary.

Zac
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Barry.SCHWARTZ]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1128 bytes --]

Anand Buddhdev <arb@anand.org> wrote:
> One of the choices I'm facing is whether to install gentoo 64-bit, or 
> 32-bit. Installing 32-bit on the AMD64 would make life easy, but kind of 
> defeats the purpose of having a 64-bit processor. Hence my request for 
> opinions. Should I go 64-bit, or stay in the 32-bit world for now?

If you need to run DOSEMU, you need to go 32-bit, and it's going to
stay that way.  (The same is _not_ true for Wine, you can run that in
64-bit Gentoo.)  Otherwise IMO if you like playing with the OS then go
64, otherwise consider going 32.  If you don't like playing with the
OS, however, then why use Gentoo?  :) So that probably means you
should go 64.

I have a 32-bit chroot that is almost as complete as my 64-bit stuff.
Effectively this means I can often use a 32-bit program from within
the chroot in nearly the same fashion as if I were running it on a
separate 32-bit installation.  It means more system maintenance work,
however.

-- 
Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org   http://www.chemoelectric.org
Esperantistoj rajtas skribi al Barijo.SXVARCO@chemoelectric.org

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Richard Freeman]

On Tue, July 12, 2005 7:27 am, Anand Buddhdev said:
> The main issues seem to be
> with firefox 32-bit plugins, and win32 codecs for use with mplayer.

I might also point out java, which nobody else has pointed out thus far. 
Simple applets and apps work fine with either blackdown or sun-jre/jdk. 
However, more complex apps can tend to break in 64-bit land due to bugs in
the VMs.  I've found some that work with blackdown only and some which run
with sun-1.5 only (which is a beta that breaks all kinds of other stuff).

I've gotten so frustrated with 1.5 issues that right now I don't have java
installed at all 64-bit.  I just run it in a 32-bit chroot.

If you are just running simple stuff I wouldn't worry about it, but if you
want to run anything complex I'd consider using a chroot...
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[gh]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed, Size: 1105 bytes --]

Anand Buddhdev a écrit :

> One of the choices I'm facing is whether to install gentoo 64-bit, or 
> 32-bit. Installing 32-bit on the AMD64 would make life easy, but kind of 
> defeats the purpose of having a 64-bit processor. Hence my request for 
> opinions. Should I go 64-bit, or stay in the 32-bit world for now?

What follows will not answer your question, but might interest you. I 
installed both amd64 and x86 on my computer just to compare the performance 
of both. After a few test (consisting of creating a tar archive of about 
3-4 Go) I conclued that a 64-bit architecture is 10% faster than a 32-bit 
one on the same hardware.

Concerning, gentoo amd64, I never had a problem that could not be resolved. 
The next step for me is to add a TV card. I hope it will work like it ever 
has ...

gh

	

	
		
___________________________________________________________________________ 
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger 
Téléchargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[JimD]

Has anyone noticed any real benefit from running their gentoo in 64-bit
vs doing everything 64-bit?

I am trying to decide if I should put the time into setting up a 32-bit
environment or and stay with 64-bit or if I should just rebuild my
system at 32-bit.

I am running with 2GB which should be fine for 32-bit.  I don't have
any specific needs for 64-bit.

Would I notice any big slow down from doing everything 32-bit on
amd64?  I am wondering if I should just go rebuild 32-bit and retry
64-bit in 6-12 months.

Any feedback would be welcome,

Jim
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Mike Arthur]

On Sunday 26 March 2006 16:33, JimD wrote:
> Has anyone noticed any real benefit from running their gentoo in 64-bit
> vs doing everything 64-bit?
>
> I am trying to decide if I should put the time into setting up a 32-bit
> environment or and stay with 64-bit or if I should just rebuild my
> system at 32-bit.
>
> I am running with 2GB which should be fine for 32-bit.  I don't have
> any specific needs for 64-bit.
>
> Would I notice any big slow down from doing everything 32-bit on
> amd64?  I am wondering if I should just go rebuild 32-bit and retry
> 64-bit in 6-12 months.
>
> Any feedback would be welcome,
>
> Jim
UT2004 flies, runs a lot faster.
A few other things seem faster.
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Simon Stelling]

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-amd64-faq.xml#perfup

-- 
Kind Regards,

Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Sunday 26 March 2006 17:33, JimD wrote:
> Has anyone noticed any real benefit from running their gentoo in 64-bit
> vs doing everything 64-bit?
>
> I am trying to decide if I should put the time into setting up a 32-bit
> environment or and stay with 64-bit or if I should just rebuild my
> system at 32-bit.
>
> I am running with 2GB which should be fine for 32-bit.  I don't have
> any specific needs for 64-bit.
>
> Would I notice any big slow down from doing everything 32-bit on
> amd64?  I am wondering if I should just go rebuild 32-bit and retry
> 64-bit in 6-12 months.
>

in 6-12 month the situation will not be different than now. 

So you can go 64 bit now. For flash and wmv files install firefox-bin and 
mplayer-bin and you are covered. Waiting is just a waste of time - install 
now and reinstall in 6 month.. why? That is one superflous installation you 
do not need to do.
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Jim]

* on the Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 07:50:46PM +0200, Hemmann, Volker Armin said:
> On Sunday 26 March 2006 17:33, JimD wrote:
> > Has anyone noticed any real benefit from running their gentoo in 64-bit
> > vs doing everything 64-bit?
> >
> > I am trying to decide if I should put the time into setting up a 32-bit
> > environment or and stay with 64-bit or if I should just rebuild my
> > system at 32-bit.
> >
> > I am running with 2GB which should be fine for 32-bit.  I don't have
> > any specific needs for 64-bit.
> >
> > Would I notice any big slow down from doing everything 32-bit on
> > amd64?  I am wondering if I should just go rebuild 32-bit and retry
> > 64-bit in 6-12 months.
> >
> 
> in 6-12 month the situation will not be different than now. 
> 
> So you can go 64 bit now. For flash and wmv files install firefox-bin and 
> mplayer-bin and you are covered. Waiting is just a waste of time - install 
> now and reinstall in 6 month.. why? That is one superflous installation you 
> do not need to do.

I started to setup a 32-bit chroot.  However I noticed that emerge wants
to merge almost a full system.  It seems silly for me to have to
maintain a complete 32-bit gentoo and a complete 64-bit gentoo.  I don't
use any programs that *need* 64-bit.

I have firefox-bin installed and that works well.  I also have
mplayer-bin installed and that is working well.  However on my x86
system I used mplayerplug-in to be able to watch media in Firefox.  The
only way I can install mplayerplug-in is to build a full 32-bit
environment with a 32-bit xorg so I can build mplayerplug-in.  That
seems like a lot of work to have to do.

For example, what other option do I have to watch a video like this:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/warner_independent_pictures/thepromise/med.html

Another possible issue I just thought about is that for me to VPN into
work I have to use Nortel Networks crappy Extranet client.  The linux
version is binary only and is a *real* pain to get to install on 32-bit.
I have not seen a 64-bit binary version so to use the VPN I would need
to run a 32-bit kernel.  Which means having 2 kernels, one 32-bit and
one 64-bit and having to reboot everytime I need to VPN.  The other
option is to install VMWare with Win2k and run the VPN client in there.
However I have not tested how that will work under a 64-bit kernel.

I have just been trying to think of a compeling reason to maintain a
32-bit gentoo and a 64-bit gentoo and have not thought of any.

Thanks for your input : )

Jim
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Sunday 26 March 2006 20:27, Jim wrote:
> * on the Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 07:50:46PM +0200, Hemmann, Volker Armin said:
> > On Sunday 26 March 2006 17:33, JimD wrote:
> > > Has anyone noticed any real benefit from running their gentoo in 64-bit
> > > vs doing everything 64-bit?
> > >
> > > I am trying to decide if I should put the time into setting up a 32-bit
> > > environment or and stay with 64-bit or if I should just rebuild my
> > > system at 32-bit.
> > >
> > > I am running with 2GB which should be fine for 32-bit.  I don't have
> > > any specific needs for 64-bit.
> > >
> > > Would I notice any big slow down from doing everything 32-bit on
> > > amd64?  I am wondering if I should just go rebuild 32-bit and retry
> > > 64-bit in 6-12 months.
> >
> > in 6-12 month the situation will not be different than now.
> >
> > So you can go 64 bit now. For flash and wmv files install firefox-bin and
> > mplayer-bin and you are covered. Waiting is just a waste of time -
> > install now and reinstall in 6 month.. why? That is one superflous
> > installation you do not need to do.
>
> I started to setup a 32-bit chroot.  However I noticed that emerge wants
> to merge almost a full system.  It seems silly for me to have to
> maintain a complete 32-bit gentoo and a complete 64-bit gentoo.  I don't
> use any programs that *need* 64-bit.
>

ok, I never setup a 32bit chroot and never need it ;)
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Barry.SCHWARTZ]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1394 bytes --]

Jim <Jim@keeliegirl.dyndns.org> skribis:
> Another possible issue I just thought about is that for me to VPN into
> work I have to use Nortel Networks crappy Extranet client.  The linux
> version is binary only and is a *real* pain to get to install on 32-bit.
> I have not seen a 64-bit binary version so to use the VPN I would need
> to run a 32-bit kernel.  Which means having 2 kernels, one 32-bit and
> one 64-bit and having to reboot everytime I need to VPN.  The other
> option is to install VMWare with Win2k and run the VPN client in there.
> However I have not tested how that will work under a 64-bit kernel.

Maybe User-Mode Linux would work for you?

I use a 32-bit chroot with essentially a complete system in
there. Once it's set up it's easier than maintaining two systems,
because the chroot doesn't have to be configured for boot and
shutdown, and because in fact most of the programs aren't used. But
space efficiency is so 1970s. A whole bloated system is there if I
want to use it for anything, such as a non-portage program that barfs
in 64-bit and which I don't feel like fixing.

-- 
Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org   http://www.chemoelectric.org
Esperantistoj rajtas skribi al Bojo ĉe chemoelectric.org.
  'Democracies don't war; democracies are peaceful countries.' - Bush
  (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051219-2.html)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Jim]

* on the Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 03:20:26PM -0600,
* Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org said:
> 
> Maybe User-Mode Linux would work for you?
> 
> I use a 32-bit chroot with essentially a complete system in
> there. Once it's set up it's easier than maintaining two systems,
> because the chroot doesn't have to be configured for boot and
> shutdown, and because in fact most of the programs aren't used. But
> space efficiency is so 1970s. A whole bloated system is there if I
> want to use it for anything, such as a non-portage program that barfs
> in 64-bit and which I don't feel like fixing.

UML sounds like it might be worth a shot.  As far as the chroot goes, I
never used gentoo that way.

What do you do for a browser?  Do you have to chroot every time you want
to run your browser?  Or do you run a 64-bit browser?  The only real
thing that I am missing is the ability to see a video in Firefox such as
the movie trailers at Apple, etc.

Jim
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Barry.SCHWARTZ]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1400 bytes --]

Jim <Jim@keeliegirl.dyndns.org> skribis:
> What do you do for a browser?  Do you have to chroot every time you want
> to run your browser?  Or do you run a 64-bit browser?  The only real
> thing that I am missing is the ability to see a video in Firefox such as
> the movie trailers at Apple, etc.

I keep browsers in both environments. Normally I run Opera (which is
32-bit) in the 64-bit environment. For some videos actually you might
have some luck with konqueror and/or mozilla-firefox-bin, without need
for the 32-bit environment, but to me it's not a lot of trouble
running things in the 32-bit environment if I have to, given how easy
it to keep Gentoo up to date. The hard work is configuring the chroot
as I like it and making it come up and go down automatically, which
was a little bit of a programming task.

There is one use for which I have found a chroot quite useful, which
is building non-portage programs 32-bit. Then I can run them just fine
in 64-bit, by making links in /usr/local/lib32 to any libraries needed
that aren't already in the emul packages. (Plus I have to run
ldconfig.)


-- 
Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org   http://www.chemoelectric.org
Esperantistoj rajtas skribi al Bojo ĉe chemoelectric.org.
  'Democracies don't war; democracies are peaceful countries.' - Bush
  (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051219-2.html)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Bertrand Jacquin]

On 3/27/06, Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org
<Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org> wrote:
> Jim <Jim@keeliegirl.dyndns.org> skribis:
> > What do you do for a browser?  Do you have to chroot every time you want
> > to run your browser?  Or do you run a 64-bit browser?  The only real
> > thing that I am missing is the ability to see a video in Firefox such as
> > the movie trailers at Apple, etc.
>
> I keep browsers in both environments. Normally I run Opera (which is
> 32-bit) in the 64-bit environment. For some videos actually you might
> have some luck with konqueror and/or mozilla-firefox-bin, without need
> for the 32-bit environment, but to me it's not a lot of trouble
> running things in the 32-bit environment if I have to, given how easy
> it to keep Gentoo up to date. The hard work is configuring the chroot
> as I like it and making it come up and go down automatically, which
> was a little bit of a programming task.
>
> There is one use for which I have found a chroot quite useful, which
> is building non-portage programs 32-bit. Then I can run them just fine
> in 64-bit, by making links in /usr/local/lib32 to any libraries needed
> that aren't already in the emul packages. (Plus I have to run
> ldconfig.)

How could you compile mplayer or firefox in your 64 bits environnement
to generate 32 bits binary ? I have multilib activated and I can't
build mplayer with CFLAGS="-m32".

It is needing something else ?

I don't want too to have and maintain a 32 bit chroot.

>
>
> --
> Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org   http://www.chemoelectric.org
> Esperantistoj rajtas skribi al Bojo ĉe chemoelectric.org.
>  'Democracies don't war; democracies are peaceful countries.' - Bush
>  (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051219-2.html)
>
>
>

-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-amd64] Re: 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Duncan]

Bertrand Jacquin posted
<43872d370603280717w2b6ccbd9l9dae6e21a9a927d2@mail.gmail.com>, excerpted
below,  on Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:17:27 +0200:

> How could you compile mplayer or firefox in your 64 bits environnement
> to generate 32 bits binary ? I have multilib activated and I can't
> build mplayer with CFLAGS="-m32".
> 
> It is needing something else ?
>
> I don't want too to have and maintain a 32 bit chroot.

There /are/ the 32-bit precompiled packages for those in the tree,
firefox-bin and mplayer-bin, if you want to merge them.  Note that these
use different executable names so you can even have both your regular
64-bit and the 32-bit-binary versions merged side by side.

As for why you can't seem to compile the 32-bit binaries, it's very
possibly because you are missing certain of the libraries and other
dependencies, or more likely, the 32-bit headers for them necessary for
compilation.  Naturally, you could track all this stuff manually, but
that's what portage is for -- only it can track only one bitness at a
time.  Thus, the idea of a 32-bit chroot, complete with its own instance
of portage, which can track all the 32-bit dependencies necessary to
compile in 32-bit what you really want, firefox and mplayer, in this case.
Sure, it's /possible/ to track all those dependencies manually, but it's
/far/ easier to run a chroot for the purpose and let portage do what
portage does well -- automate all that stuff for you so you don't have to
worry about it.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman in
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html


-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Barry.SCHWARTZ]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1447 bytes --]

Bertrand Jacquin <beber.gentoo@gmail.com> skribis:
> How could you compile mplayer or firefox in your 64 bits environnement
> to generate 32 bits binary ? I have multilib activated and I can't
> build mplayer with CFLAGS="-m32".
> 
> It is needing something else ?
> 
> I don't want too to have and maintain a 32 bit chroot.

You don’t want to use portage to build 32-bit versions in the 64-bit
environment. If you want to build these programs then do it outside of
portage, according to the INSTALL instructions (or similar) that come
with the programs. The problem then is you may have to build libraries
used by the programs, too, creating a lot of ‘infrastructure’ in
/usr/local. There’s nothing wrong with that, except I prefer to have
the chroot and use portage to maintain my 32-bit libraries.

Currently there is very little support in portage to build 32-bit
software in the 64-bit environment. I don’t know, though, that a truly
multilib Gentoo would be significantly easier to maintain than a
64+chroot32 Gentoo. The main trouble is that there isn’t a lot of
support for setting up the chroot, either. There’s no ebuild for it.

-- 
Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org   http://www.chemoelectric.org
Esperantistoj rajtas skribi al Bojo ĉe chemoelectric.org.
  'Democracies don't war; democracies are peaceful countries.' - Bush
  (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051219-2.html)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Simon Stelling]

Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org wrote:
> Currently there is very little support in portage to build 32-bit
> software in the 64-bit environment. I don’t know, though, that a truly
> multilib Gentoo would be significantly easier to maintain than a
> 64+chroot32 Gentoo. The main trouble is that there isn’t a lot of
> support for setting up the chroot, either. There’s no ebuild for it.

There's a pretty brief howto:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/howtos/index.xml?part=1&chap=2

If you think it's could be improved, let me know how and I'll try to do sth
about it ;)

Beside that, I've put app-portage/emool into the tree yesterday.. It's a tool
which automatically creates a emul-style tarball from a list of depend atoms.

-- 
Kind Regards,

Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Barry.SCHWARTZ]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 513 bytes --]

Simon Stelling <blubb@gentoo.org> skribis:
> Beside that, I've put app-portage/emool into the tree yesterday.. It's a tool
> which automatically creates a emul-style tarball from a list of depend atoms.

Now that sounds useful. Thanks.

-- 
Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org   http://www.chemoelectric.org
Esperantistoj rajtas skribi al Bojo ĉe chemoelectric.org.
  'Democracies don't war; democracies are peaceful countries.' - Bush
  (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051219-2.html)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Marco Matthies]

Bertrand Jacquin wrote:
> How could you compile mplayer or firefox in your 64 bits environnement
> to generate 32 bits binary ? I have multilib activated and I can't
> build mplayer with CFLAGS="-m32".
> 
> It is needing something else ?
> 
> I don't want too to have and maintain a 32 bit chroot.

I'm assuming you're talking about compiling something by hand here. As 
other people have mentioned here, support for portage to compile 
arbitrary apps/libs 32-bit or 64-bit isn't there yet (at least in stable 
portage which is what i'm using), every ebuild for amd64 at the moment 
chooses either 32-bit or 64-bit (by setting ABI=x86 or ABI=amd64).

You need the 32-bit libs (which should go into /lib32 and /usr/lib32) 
that your application depends on. At a bare minimum, this is going to be 
libc for C programs, but usually some other libs as well. To make 
precompiled dynamically linked 32-bit binaries such as mplayer-bin 
possible, gentoo also supplies the libs needed for these binary ebuilds 
in /emul/linux/x86 which are installed by the emul-linux-x86-* ebuilds.

So, if the app you want to compile by hand uses only these, you can get 
away with something along the lines of:

./configure \
CFLAGS="-m32 -L/emul/linux/x86/lib -L/emul/linux/x86/usr/lib" \
LDFLAGS="-m32 -L/emul/linux/x86/lib -L/emul/linux/x86/usr/lib"

or

./configure \
CFLAGS="-m32 -L/emul/linux/x86/lib -L/emul/linux/x86/usr/lib" \
LDFLAGS="-m elf_i386 -L/emul/linux/x86/lib -L/emul/linux/x86/usr/lib"

Which one of these two lines you need to use depends on if LDFLAGS gets 
passed to gcc or ld by the makefile.
(see /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2006.0/make.defaults)

If the app you want to compile needs additional libs, you'll have to 
compile them yourself, install them under /usr/local and then compile 
the app you're interested in -- this probably quickly becomes annoying 
enough to make a 32-bit chroot so you can let portage+ebuilds do all the 
work for you.

Marco
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Bertrand Jacquin]

On 3/29/06, Marco Matthies <marco-ml@gmx.net> wrote:
> Bertrand Jacquin wrote:
> > How could you compile mplayer or firefox in your 64 bits environnement
> > to generate 32 bits binary ? I have multilib activated and I can't
> > build mplayer with CFLAGS="-m32".
> >
> > It is needing something else ?
> >
> > I don't want too to have and maintain a 32 bit chroot.
>
> I'm assuming you're talking about compiling something by hand here. As
> other people have mentioned here, support for portage to compile
> arbitrary apps/libs 32-bit or 64-bit isn't there yet (at least in stable
> portage which is what i'm using), every ebuild for amd64 at the moment
> chooses either 32-bit or 64-bit (by setting ABI=x86 or ABI=amd64).

No, maybe I misspell what I was wanting to say (my english sux too).

The first exemple I wrote was in reality :
CFLAGS="-m32" emerge -avt mozilla-firefox

To be clear : I don't want a chroot, because it make be 2 gentoo to
maintain and a lot of things unecessary ATM.
I would like portage build for me a software in 32 bit mode.
If it's a lib, I would like portage to install it in /emul/linux/x86
if I tell him to do that

Like a (just an example) :
emerge -avt libvorbis --abi 32

For example, I would to compile mplayer with portage and have to
choice in USE flags, not as mplayer-bin.

Maybe now it could be more clear for all. (I hope)

> You need the 32-bit libs (which should go into /lib32 and /usr/lib32)
> that your application depends on. At a bare minimum, this is going to be
> libc for C programs, but usually some other libs as well. To make
> precompiled dynamically linked 32-bit binaries such as mplayer-bin
> possible, gentoo also supplies the libs needed for these binary ebuilds
> in /emul/linux/x86 which are installed by the emul-linux-x86-* ebuilds.

Yeah, I would like to avoid precompiled packages.

> So, if the app you want to compile by hand uses only these, you can get
> away with something along the lines of:
>
> ./configure \
> CFLAGS="-m32 -L/emul/linux/x86/lib -L/emul/linux/x86/usr/lib" \
> LDFLAGS="-m32 -L/emul/linux/x86/lib -L/emul/linux/x86/usr/lib"
>
> or
>
> ./configure \
> CFLAGS="-m32 -L/emul/linux/x86/lib -L/emul/linux/x86/usr/lib" \
> LDFLAGS="-m elf_i386 -L/emul/linux/x86/lib -L/emul/linux/x86/usr/lib"
>
> Which one of these two lines you need to use depends on if LDFLAGS gets
> passed to gcc or ld by the makefile.
> (see /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2006.0/make.defaults)
>
> If the app you want to compile needs additional libs, you'll have to
> compile them yourself, install them under /usr/local and then compile
> the app you're interested in -- this probably quickly becomes annoying
> enough to make a 32-bit chroot so you can let portage+ebuilds do all the
> work for you.

I would like to avoid it too.

Beber

-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Bertrand Jacquin]

On 3/29/06, Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org
<Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org> wrote:
> Simon Stelling <blubb@gentoo.org> skribis:
> > Beside that, I've put app-portage/emool into the tree yesterday.. It's a tool
> > which automatically creates a emul-style tarball from a list of depend atoms.
>
> Now that sounds useful. Thanks.

Yes nice. But what does it do ? It compile things ? Just tarball ?
I searched do about it, read man, read help and I still can't find
exactly what it do. I didn't get time to look the code

--
Beber

-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Marco Matthies]

Bertrand Jacquin wrote:
> The first exemple I wrote was in reality :
> CFLAGS="-m32" emerge -avt mozilla-firefox
> 
> To be clear : I don't want a chroot, because it make be 2 gentoo to
> maintain and a lot of things unecessary ATM.
> I would like portage build for me a software in 32 bit mode.
> If it's a lib, I would like portage to install it in /emul/linux/x86
> if I tell him to do that

Sorry, i missed the part about you not wanting a chroot. As far as I 
know, portage currently does not support installing 32-bit and 64-bit 
versions of the same package, i.e. it does not know anything about the 
bitness a package was compiled for and therefore doesn't use this 
information for dependency resolution. In other words, it will not know 
that the X11 libs it installed are 64-bit and that the firefox you want 
to compile for 32-bits needs the 32-bit X11 libs.

Marco
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Vladimir G. Ivanovic]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 928 bytes --]

On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 12:19 +0200, Bertrand Jacquin wrote:


> I would like portage build for me a software in 32 bit mode.
> If it's a lib, I would like portage to install it in /emul/linux/x86
> if I tell him to do that
> 

Doesn't this do what you want?

        linux32 emerge -avt mozilla-firefox

>From the manpage for linux32:

        linux32  creates  a  32bit  environment for the specified program, usually a shell.
        The environment is inherited by all child processes of that  program,  unless  they
        set  a  different  personality.  The 32bit environment currently means all uname(1) 
        system calls (and thus also the outputs of the  uname(1)  program  with  -m  or  -a
        options) will return a 32bit type instead of a 64bit type as the machine type.
        
        linux64 can be used to temporarily switch back.

--- Vladimir

Vladimir G. Ivanovic
Palo Alto, CA 94306
+1 650 678 8014

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1533 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Simon Stelling]

Vladimir G. Ivanovic wrote:
> Doesn't this do what you want?

No, not at all. Portage doesn't decide what bitness to choose depending 
on CHOST. What he wants to know is something we're still working on, but 
it's not as easy as one might think. All immediate workarounds are 
pretty dangerous and will probably screw up your dependency tree.

-- 
Kind Regards,

Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Simon Stelling]

Bertrand Jacquin wrote:
> Yes nice. But what does it do ? It compile things ? Just tarball ?
> I searched do about it, read man, read help and I still can't find
> exactly what it do. I didn't get time to look the code

It takes a x86 stage3 (which you have to download before) and a portage 
snapshot if you want it to, does all the necessary work to properly set 
up the 32bit chroot, compiles the packages you told it to, clears up 
everything, checks links for being correct and then packs everything 
into a tarball. So you end up with a tarball that looks almost exactly 
like the ones we use for app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-*.

-- 
Kind Regards,

Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-amd64] Re: 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Duncan]

Marco Matthies posted <442A6C24.2090801@gmx.net>, excerpted below,  on
Wed, 29 Mar 2006 13:14:44 +0200:

> Bertrand Jacquin wrote:
>> The first exemple I wrote was in reality :
>> CFLAGS="-m32" emerge -avt mozilla-firefox
>> 
>> To be clear : I don't want a chroot, because it make be 2 gentoo to
>> maintain and a lot of things unecessary ATM.
>> I would like portage build for me a software in 32 bit mode.
>> If it's a lib, I would like portage to install it in /emul/linux/x86
>> if I tell him to do that
> 
> Sorry, i missed the part about you not wanting a chroot. As far as I 
> know, portage currently does not support installing 32-bit and 64-bit 
> versions of the same package, i.e. it does not know anything about the 
> bitness a package was compiled for and therefore doesn't use this 
> information for dependency resolution. In other words, it will not know 
> that the X11 libs it installed are 64-bit and that the firefox you want 
> to compile for 32-bits needs the 32-bit X11 libs.

That's correct.  You /will/ eventually trash your system trying to do
this, as portage will get hopelessly confused trying to merge stuff with
dependencies it /thinks/ you have already merged, only you don't, because
you merged them in the other bitness.

The easiest way to keep portage from getting confused is to run two
separate instances of it that don't know about each other.  The way you do
that is to run a 32-bit chroot.  Yes, it /does/ require a certain amount
of duplication, but if you use a stage-3 x86 install and the binary
packages CD, it's not /too/ bad.  You lose a bit of customization going
pre-built binaries, but it's a trade-off between that and the time to
compile all that stuff twice.  You can always remerge the specific
packages you want to.

At some point in the future, likely with the ongoing full rewrite
project rewrite that's very possibly a year or two away from release,
altho the feature may well be backported some time before then, it's
planned that portage will have a multi-bitness deps tracker and resolver. 
However, that's a /long/ way off.  Meanwhile, you can either go 32-bit
only, 64-bit only, or run a multilib system.  If you run a multilib
system, you can choose limited 32-bit support based on the 32-bit binary
compatibility libs, or full 32-bit support based on a chroot, with all the
time necessary to maintain it balanced against the better 32-bit support.

Personally, I don't like closed source slaveryware in any case, and
basically won't have it on my machine.  If I was content being someone's
slave because they don't respect me as a user enough to give me my rights,
I could have stayed on MSWormOS.  After all, I left a decade of knowledge
behind when I switched, and I /could/ have just stayed where I was.  I
found it worth my time to switch, and there's no way I'm going to consent
or allow myself to be tied down to unfreedomware now, or why did I switch
in the first place?  That makes the 32-bit/64-bit software issue much
easier, since the non-marginal freedomware was ported a long time ago and
has been available in 64-bit native for soome time.  It's only the
marginal stuff, and closed source slaveryware that I couldn't/wouldn't run
anyway, that's 32-bit only, now.

Of course, I'm mature enough to realize not everyone holds my values,
neither do I expect them to, so I recognize that those that choose to run
what I consider slaveryware can make that choice, just as I made mine. 
Just don't ask me to take part in it.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman in
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html


-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Mike Arthur]

On Wednesday 29 March 2006 16:35, Simon Stelling wrote:
> Bertrand Jacquin wrote:
> > Yes nice. But what does it do ? It compile things ? Just tarball ?
> > I searched do about it, read man, read help and I still can't find
> > exactly what it do. I didn't get time to look the code
>
> It takes a x86 stage3 (which you have to download before) and a portage
> snapshot if you want it to, does all the necessary work to properly set
> up the 32bit chroot, compiles the packages you told it to, clears up
> everything, checks links for being correct and then packs everything
> into a tarball. So you end up with a tarball that looks almost exactly
> like the ones we use for app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-*.
If I already have a 32-bit chroot set up, how would I go about creating emul- 
or -bin packages from this chroot?
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Simon Stelling]

Mike Arthur wrote:
> If I already have a 32-bit chroot set up, how would I go about creating emul- 
> or -bin packages from this chroot?

Setting tmpdir=/path/to/your/chroot in /etc/emool/emool.conf should do 
the trick. However, be careful, it'll overwrite /root/.bash_profile to 
start itself inside the chroot. So if you use that chroot for other 
things too, you have to back it up first (or just delete it afterwards 
if it didn't exist before).

-- 
Kind Regards,

Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Mike Arthur]

On Wednesday 29 March 2006 18:36, Simon Stelling wrote:
> Mike Arthur wrote:
> > If I already have a 32-bit chroot set up, how would I go about creating
> > emul- or -bin packages from this chroot?
>
> Setting tmpdir=/path/to/your/chroot in /etc/emool/emool.conf should do
> the trick. However, be careful, it'll overwrite /root/.bash_profile to
> start itself inside the chroot. So if you use that chroot for other
> things too, you have to back it up first (or just delete it afterwards
> if it didn't exist before).
Cool.
What I meant though, is how I'd do that without emool, sorry!
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-amd64] 32-bit Netscape Plugins in Konqueror

[Mike Arthur]

Thought I'd cross-post this from the forums, it's a script that lets Konqueror 
run 32-bit netcape plugins.

I'm thinking of writing an ebuild that will download the actual sources needed 
for this and compile them nicely. 
 Currently, the following libraries are needed, for KDE 3.5.2 and not provided 
by some emul-* package. 
 These can be obtained from me here: http://1f2.myby.co.uk/nsplugin32.tar.bz2
 libart_lgpl_2.so.2 
 libDCOP.so.4 
 libidn.so.11 
 libkdecore.so.4 
 libkdefx.so.4 
 libkdesu.so.4 
 libkdeui.so.4 
 libkio.so.4 
 libkparts.so.2 
 libkwalletclient.so.1 
 libXdmcp.so.6 
 
 
Code:

 #!/bin/bash 
 # 32-bit netscape plugin support for KDE on AMD64 
 CHROOT32="/emul/chroot" 
 NSPLUGIN32="/root/nsplugin32" 
 KDEDIR="/usr/kde/3.5" 
 
 function setup { 
   echo 
   echo "================ nsplugin32.sh ===================" 
   echo "Setting up 32-bit netscape plugin support..." 
   echo "==================================================" 
   echo 
   echo "Copying needed 32bit netscape plugin libraries..." 
   echo 
   mkdir -p $NSPLUGIN32/bin32/ 
   mkdir -p $NSPLUGIN32/lib32/ 
   cd $CHROOT32$KDEDIR/bin 
   cp -v nspluginscan nspluginviewer $NSPLUGIN32/bin32/ 
   cd $CHROOT32$KDEDIR/lib 
   cp -v libDCOP.so.4 libkdecore.so.4 libkdefx.so.4 libkdesu.so.4 
libkdeui.so.4 libkio.so.4 libkparts.so.2 libkwalletclient.so.1 
$NSPLUGIN32/lib32/ 
   cd $CHROOT32/usr/lib/ 
   cp -v libart_lgpl_2.so.2 libidn.so.11 libXdmcp.so.6 $NSPLUGIN32/lib32/ 
   cd $NSPLUGIN32/lib32/ 
   cp -v libart_lgpl_2.so.2 libDCOP.so.4 libidn.so.11 libkdecore.so.4 
libkdefx.so.4 libkdesu.so.4 libkdeui.so.4 libkio.so.4 libkparts.so.2 
libkwalletclient.so.1 libXdmcp.so.6 /usr/lib32/ 
   cp -v $NSPLUGIN32/bin32/* $KDEDIR/bin/ 
   if [ ! -e $NSPLUGIN32/bin64/ ]; then 
     echo 
     echo "Backing up 64bit KDE netscape plugin handlers..." 
     echo 
     mkdir -p $NSPLUGIN32/bin64/ 
     cd $KDEDIR/bin 
     mv -v nspluginscan nspluginviewer $NSPLUGIN32/bin64/ 
   fi 
   echo 
   echo "Copying 32bit KDE netscape plugin handlers..." 
   echo 
   cp -v $NSPLUGIN32/bin32/* $KDEDIR/bin/ 
   echo 
   echo "Running ldconfig..." 
   echo 
   ldconfig 
   echo 
   ldd $KDEDIR/bin/nspluginviewer | grep "not found" 
   if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then 
     echo "Done." 
     echo 
     echo "You may now open Konqueror's plugin settings and " 
     echo "scan for available plugins. There seems to be a " 
     echo "problem with the ARTS routing and 32bit plugins, " 
     echo "so make sure to disable it in the plugin settings!" 
   else 
     echo "Not all needed libraries found, restoring 64-bit netscape" 
     echo "plugin support..." 
     restore &> /dev/null 
         echo "Find missing libraries and retry" 
   fi 
 } 
 
 function restore { 
   echo 
   echo "================ nsplugin32.sh ===================" 
   echo "Restoring 64-bit netscape plugin support..." 
   echo "==================================================" 
   echo 
   echo "Removing needed 32bit libraries..." 
   echo 
   cd /usr/lib32/ 
   rm -v libart_lgpl_2.so.2 libDCOP.so.4 libidn.so.11 libkdecore.so.4 
libkdefx.so.4 libkdesu.so.4 libkdeui.so.4 libkio.so.4 libkparts.so.2 
libkwalletclient.so.1 libXdmcp.so.6 
   echo 
   echo "Removing 32bit KDE netscape plugin handlers..." 
   echo 
   rm -v $KDEDIR/bin/nspluginscan $KDEDIR/bin/nspluginviewer 
   echo 
   echo "Restoring 64bit KDE netscape plugin handlers..." 
   echo 
   cd $NSPLUGIN32/bin64/ 
   cp -v nspluginscan nspluginviewer $KDEDIR/bin/ 
   cd $NSPLUGIN32/ 
   rm -rv bin64/ 
   echo 
   echo "Running ldconfig..." 
   echo  ldconfig 
   echo 
   echo "Done" 
   echo 
 } 
 
 if [ "$1" == "setup" ]; then 
   setup 
   exit 
 elif [ "$1" == "restore" ]; then 
   restore 
   exit 
 else 
   echo "================ nsplugin32.sh ===================" 
   echo "32-bit netscape plugin support for KDE on AMD64" 
   echo "You must specify an argument: 'setup' or 'restore'" 
   echo "==================================================" 
   exit 1 
 fi 
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] 64-bit or 32-bit?

[Barry.SCHWARTZ]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 828 bytes --]

Simon Stelling <blubb@gentoo.org> skribis:
> Mike Arthur wrote:
> >If I already have a 32-bit chroot set up, how would I go about creating emul- or -bin packages from this chroot?
> 
> Setting tmpdir=/path/to/your/chroot in /etc/emool/emool.conf should do the trick. However, be careful, it'll overwrite 
> /root/.bash_profile to start itself inside the chroot. So if you use that chroot for other things too, you have to back it up 
> first (or just delete it afterwards if it didn't exist before).

Hah! Being a zsh user pays off once again. :)

-- 
Barry.SCHWARTZ@chemoelectric.org   http://www.chemoelectric.org
Esperantistoj rajtas skribi al Bojo ĉe chemoelectric.org.
  'Democracies don't war; democracies are peaceful countries.' - Bush
  (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051219-2.html)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]