From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NqcG6-0001ey-Sr for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:04:47 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 87EB7E0A63 for ; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:04:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29859E0854 for ; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:34:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nqbn4-0002I1-I9 for gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:34:46 +0100 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:34:46 +0100 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:34:46 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Wine with no-multilib on AMD64 Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:34:37 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20100313141534.GA7803@mars.lan> <201003131629.06701.volkerarmin@googlemail.com> <201003140027.20430.volkerarmin@googlemail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 650ffcd0-d352-4398-9a7b-9baeb30cb7cd X-Archives-Hash: ab5e6766be2030561c4b6ef8af3730fb Volker Armin Hemmann posted on Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:27:20 +0100 as excerpted: > so you wasted a lot of space. For what benefit again? What, you can't even read? In the same message you quoted part of, I=20 explained why -- I build my (32-bit only) netbook image in that chroot, o= n=20 my main machine. I then rsync the completely build and configured image=20 to my netbook, thus allowing me to run Gentoo on the netbook without=20 having to actually /build/ Gentoo on the netbook. > And - because you seem to lack some understanding. There is no 'dirtyin= g > up'. So please, keep your dubios advise down. Chrooting just to be able > to run an app is not a good choice, if a few mb of 32bit libs, residing > in /usr/lib32 would be all that is needed. Well, depending on what you consider dirtying it up. If you consider=20 unnecessarily installing a somewhat brittle dual-bitness toolchain that=20 has an annoying tendency to have the 32-bit side break at times "dirtying= =20 up", if you consider it installing only generically optimized 32-bit=20 binary-only emul-linux libraries "dirtying up", then yes, it's definitely= =20 "dirtying up". Certainly so as opposed to a separate full 32-bit chroot,= =20 thus allowing the 64-bit side to stay clean 64-bit (no brittle dual- bitness toolchain), and no compromise only generic optimizations binary=20 emul-linux libraries. Now a 32-bit chroot is definitely more work than standard multilib, but=20 it's also definitely cleaner, and from personal experience, less brittle.= =20 It's also far more flexible. Whether it's worth the tradeoff is for an=20 individual to decide. I was simply posting that the 32-bit chroot thing is possible with no-multilib, something that's poorly documented, so some people might not= =20 realize it's even possible. (They may think that multilib is required fo= r=20 it.) --=20 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