Arch Linux

RobK

Member

Registered: 2005-12-07

Posts: 121

32 Bit Libs vs. chroot

I see to get 32 bit applications to run on Arch64, you have two main options:

1) chroot into  a 32-bit arch system within arch64; or

2) use 32 bit libraries from AUR (and maybe community?)

Option 2 sounds a bit more straight forward.  But can you run a 32-bit browser with flash and java using option 2? 

The artitcle on the wiki  ( http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Usi … _on_Arch64 ) does not mention java.

If I want to run a 32-bit browser with java, am I forced to go the chroot way?

RobK

skottish

Forum Fellow

From: Here

Registered: 2006-06-16

Posts: 7,942

Re: 32 Bit Libs vs. chroot

You can try running 64 bit Java through Icedtea6 (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=16290). It's working great for me. Some people are having build problems though.

RobK

Member

Registered: 2005-12-07

Posts: 121

Re: 32 Bit Libs vs. chroot

Thanks for the reply but I was hoping to use the Sun Java Binaries. 

If I use the Sun Java binaries, am I forced to go the chroot way?

skottish

Forum Fellow

From: Here

Registered: 2006-06-16

Posts: 7,942

Re: 32 Bit Libs vs. chroot

If I use the Sun Java binaries, am I forced to go the chroot way?

Not necessarily. If I remember correctly, there are already some solutions in AUR with Java and such which may help you do this more easily. A 32 bit chroot will work, but I can't help you there seeing that I've never tried. Although, if you search the forums for a bit, you'll find that others have.

By the way, Icedtea is using Sun's code. Version 6 is a combination of GNU and Sun technologies, OpenJDK (also in AUR) is the collaborative effort to fully open source Java.

Janax

Member

From: Iowa

Registered: 2007-05-21

Posts: 86

Re: 32 Bit Libs vs. chroot

Indeed, you are not alone.  See these links if you want to run a 32-bit browser in a 64-bit kernel without a chroot:

Choose one of these to use as your browser:
bin32-swiftfox-prescott For "Firefox 2", Intel Core processors
bin32-swiftfox-athlon64 "Firefox 2", AMD processors
bin32-swiftfox3-prescott For "Firefox 3"

And the plugins:
lib32-flashplugin
lib32-jdk

These (and their older versions) are what I have been using since I migrated to Arch from Gentoo about a year ago.  You will have to create a link to the JDK plugin in order for the browser to see it.  Just use these commands:

# ln -s /opt/java32/jre/plugin/i386/ns7/libjavaplugin_oji.so /opt/mozilla/lib/plugins/

If you don't have it yet, use yaourt, because it makes using AUR packages really easy!

fwojciec

Member

Registered: 2007-05-20

Posts: 1,411

Re: 32 Bit Libs vs. chroot

I've used both lib32 and chroot solutions in the past and personally I prefer the chroot solution -- this is what I'm using at the moment.  It seems tidier to me, more transparent/elegant, although, admittedly, it takes a bit more work and figuring stuff out at first (for me it was the first real contact with the whole concept of a chroot environment).  The chroot method is arguably more flexible, since you are not limited to what is available in AUR as far as running 32bit apps is concerned (although you could always build your own lib/bin32 packages, I suppose).  Finally, when at some stage I decide that I no longer need 32bit software, removing the entire 32bit part of my system will be as easy as removing a directory and a daemon script.

RobK

Member

Registered: 2005-12-07

Posts: 121

Re: 32 Bit Libs vs. chroot

Great.  Thanks for all the comments.

If I want to run a browser with the flash and java plugins, it really looks like I have two main options:

1)  Run a 64-bit browser and the 64 bit IceTea6 java plugin and the Flash wrapper.

2)  Run a 32-bit browser with Flash and Java (either using 32 bit libs or chrootig into a 32 bit version of Arch)

Since I want to try to go with 64 bit binaries where possible, I think I will give option 1 a shot!

RobK

Ambi

Member

From: Warsaw, Poland

Registered: 2007-11-29

Posts: 44

Re: 32 Bit Libs vs. chroot

The chroot method is arguably more flexible, since you are not limited to what is available in AUR as far as running 32bit apps is concerned.

To me there was one annoying issue with chroot solution: I was unable to open files outside arch32 installation point. he other thing is that you have to configure two OSes instead of one. This is why I prefer bin32-* packages from AUR.

Aaron

Member

From: PA, USA

Registered: 2007-12-19

Posts: 108

Website

Re: 32 Bit Libs vs. chroot

The chroot method is arguably more flexible, since you are not limited to what is available in AUR as far as running 32bit apps is concerned.

To me there was one annoying issue with chroot solution: I was unable to open files outside arch32 installation point. he other thing is that you have to configure two OSes instead of one. This is why I prefer bin32-* packages from AUR.

What exactly couldn't you open?

From your regular desktop(64bit), you access your 32bit chroot through /opt/arch32.  For example, to look in my /etc folder of my arch32, I would simply use.
$ ls /opt/arch32/etc

And there isn't much maintaining of the chroot, once it's installed it's pretty much done.  You don't have to continuously upgrade or tweak it, all you do is run programs out of it.  Look into dchroot.

fwojciec

Member

Registered: 2007-05-20

Posts: 1,411

Re: 32 Bit Libs vs. chroot

The chroot method is arguably more flexible, since you are not limited to what is available in AUR as far as running 32bit apps is concerned.

To me there was one annoying issue with chroot solution: I was unable to open files outside arch32 installation point. he other thing is that you have to configure two OSes instead of one. This is why I prefer bin32-* packages from AUR.

Neither of the things you mention is really an issue for me, it's simply a matter of setting things up properly.  Like Aaron says -- once the chroot environment is properly set up it works very smoothly.  You can have your /home and whatever data partitions you might have --bind mounted withing the chroot so all your non-system files are available for the applications executed from the chroot.  And it's easy to write simple scripts/aliases to run the apps from the chroot without problems using dchroot -d [app].  Updating is also not an issue, I just have a script that updates both my regular system and the chroot system using a single command.  There also isn't really that much work involved in configuring the chroot system -- basically it's just a matter of copying some config files from /etc to /opt/arch32/etc -- that's it.

Last edited by fwojciec (2008-04-19 00:45:17)