multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

Marenz · 2010-08-16 18:52:45

This thread is for request and feedback about my multilib repository. I am subscribed to it and I will get an email which I also check on a regular basis.

Right now I can't do any updates because my 64bit hardware is not available. This will most likely change in about two weeks.

If anyone wants to help me maintaining this, please step forward. I can also grant you access to the git repository with the PKGBUILD's that I used.

[Edit]

As there is a new project which obsoleted mine, I will shut down my mirror & git soon. The link above no longer points to my repository, so please direct requests now at the appropriate people.

--Marenz

Last edited by Marenz (2010-08-23 13:42:45)

skodabenz · 2010-08-23 06:48:09

Official multilib support is coming - https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Multilib_Project

wonder · 2010-08-23 07:00:43

just to let you know, that repo would hit official mirrors soon enough and shouldn't be thread as an unknown repo .

suggestions and feature requests would be done on the arch-multilib mailing list once it would be created

Marenz · 2010-08-23 08:52:39

Okay, I'll take my repos & git offline then, if it is no longer needed? (as you apparently even try to hijack this thread )

--Marenz

Last edited by Marenz (2010-08-23 08:53:37)

wonder · 2010-08-23 09:02:09

Marenz wrote:

Okay, I'll take my repos & git offline then, if it is no longer needed? (as you apparently even try to hijack this thread )
--Marenz

i didn't tried to hijack anything because at the time i've read the text from your link location is pointing to our temporally repository. It doesn't point to any git/repos owned by you

Marenz · 2010-08-23 13:32:51

Actually it does. Look at the bottom, it says:

The sources for this repository are also available at git://supraverse.net/multilib.git

--Marenz

skodabenz · 2010-08-23 13:43:31

Marenz wrote:

Okay, I'll take my repos & git offline then, if it is no longer needed? (as you apparently even try to hijack this thread )
--Marenz

I would be that hijacker! "wonder" (or any TU for that matter) had nothing to do with this. I thought based on this thread's topic, that this is for discussion regarding the "new" multilib repo. I thought you were one of those guys listed at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Multilib_Project . I edited that wiki page to link to this thread and modified http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch64_FAQ to show the "new" temporary repo. Sorry for the mistake. If you want I will remove the link to this thread in the wiki page.

By the way

[keshav_pr@keshav-laptop Desktop]$ git clone git://supraverse.net/multilib.git multilib
Cloning into multilib...
fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly

Last edited by skodabenz (2010-08-23 13:44:58)

Marenz · 2010-08-23 13:50:15

Oh I don't mind, it just created some confusion .

I can fit the text accordingly (Tell me what text you want in the first topic then) or you can create a new thread, what ever you prefer.

And with "you" I meant not specifically "wonder" but just the people of the new project

I am curious though, why did no one talk to me about this, as I provided the first working multilib gcc for arch. It could have been reused. Or maybe you did reuse it, no idea.

[Edit]
You might should edit the wiki instructions accordingly. Currently they still reflect the workarounds for some minor issues with my repos.

--Marenz

Last edited by Marenz (2010-08-23 13:53:22)

skodabenz · 2010-08-23 13:53:51

I do not know anything related to your PKGBUILDs (and I am not a TU). But I used your gcc-multilib to compile grub2-bzr and grub2-efi-x86 in my Arch64. In between though, I briefly used cross32-gcc from community. Currently I am using the gcc-multilib from the temp repo.

May be you should also join those guys working on Multilib Project. Anyway thanks for your packages. They were very useful. You can probably use "Supraverse multilib repo" to avoid confusing with the upcoming official multilib repo.

Last edited by skodabenz (2010-08-23 13:58:55)

ngoonee · 2010-08-23 14:30:09

'Those guys working on the multilib project' are basically interested TUs and devs. Please check out [arch-dev-public], discussion on this project is ongoing currently.

wantilles · 2010-08-23 18:52:13

IMHO amd64 archers, we do not need at all multilib.

It breaks KISS, it consumes a lot of human hours/resources.

And most of all, it is completely USELESS.

Marenz · 2010-08-23 19:00:55

/me hugs wantilles

wonder · 2010-08-23 19:05:22

wantilles wrote:

IMHO amd64 archers, we do not need at all multilib.
It breaks KISS, it consumes a lot of human hours/resources.
And most of all, it is completely USELESS.

don't be worried about that. is not enable by default at for x86_64 users. it would be a separate repo and if you want you can enable it.

even more, x86_64 would be purely native and all lib32 stuff deleted from community

ngoonee · 2010-08-23 21:17:47

wantilles wrote:

IMHO amd64 archers, we do not need at all multilib.
It breaks KISS, it consumes a lot of human hours/resources.
And most of all, it is completely USELESS.

Obviously you have no need of skype or wine. Having an opinion is fine, but its a bit overboard to claim that its useless.

As wonder said, this move would actually allow [core], [extra], and [community] to be 64-bit only. Well, except for grub....

wantilles · 2010-08-23 22:32:44

ngoonee wrote:

Obviously you have no need of skype.

I value very much my personal data, and my privacy.

For the same reason I never use any software developed by Google, Sony, Apple, and never any closed-source web browser or mail-client.

ngoonee wrote:

...or wine.

I have VirtualBox for that.

some-guy94 · 2010-08-23 23:32:42

wantilles wrote:

ngoonee wrote:
Obviously you have no need of skype.
I value very much my personal data, and my privacy.
For the same reason I never use any software developed by Google, Sony, Apple, and never any closed-source web browser or mail-client.
ngoonee wrote:
...or wine.
I have VirtualBox for that.

VirtualBox needs multilib.

wantilles · 2010-08-24 01:31:07

some-guy94 wrote:

wantilles wrote:
ngoonee wrote:
Obviously you have no need of skype.
I value very much my personal data, and my privacy.
For the same reason I never use any software developed by Google, Sony, Apple, and never any closed-source web browser or mail-client.
ngoonee wrote:
...or wine.
I have VirtualBox for that.
VirtualBox needs multilib.

Hmm, I don't think so. Check the PKGBUILDs:

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=9753
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=31996

ngoonee · 2010-08-24 02:21:26

virtualbox-ose is the one that needs multilib.

You're free to not need the mentioned software, of course. Doesn't mean its useless.

sand_man · 2010-08-24 03:56:56

Not sure if I'd use it or not but I think it's a great idea. I'm all for choice and diversity.

jelly · 2010-08-25 09:18:48

There is still an option to use a 32 bit chroot instead of multilib. It costs some more space but it's a bit saner

ngoonee · 2010-08-25 10:15:38

Let's not make this thread a discussion on the value or otherwise of the multilib repo, or even the possible alternatives. This thread is for discussing the repository which does exist, and giving feedback on problems etc. (don't forget to regularly thank the contributors, as well ).

mangus · 2010-08-25 18:03:05

so, I enabled the multilib repo and let pacman do the job replacing the toolchain stuff , then upgrade the rest from the multilib repo , I ran ldconfig just in case and:

┌─[mangus@tao64][19:57]
└─[~]-> skype
skype-bin: error while loading shared libraries: libssl.so.1.0.0: wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS64

the skype package is bin32-skype http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=7914

Im not that multilib expert , what I'm missing?Do I have to recompile something for aur packages?
thanks

Marenz · 2010-08-25 18:05:33

sounds like you are missing lib32-ssl or lib32-libssl or however it is called

--Marenz

mangus · 2010-08-25 18:10:44

Marenz wrote:

sounds like you are missing lib32-ssl or lib32-libssl or however it is called

--Marenz

I have installed lib32-openssl 1.0.0.a-4 from multilib repo

edit: and in the meantime version 1.0.0.a-5 of lib32-openssl solved the issue
thanks for the quick response and for the super superquick fix to the dev!

Last edited by mangus (2010-08-25 18:12:37)

fincan · 2010-08-26 11:56:18

I want to leave why there is multilib repository. are packages inside multilib different from others? For examlpe, differences wine-multilib from the current 1? Why should I use multilib?
U say u move all 32bit packages to multilib and will current installed 32 packages be updated automatically from multilib or we'll have to do it manuall?, so on...

Arch Linux

#1 2010-08-16 18:52:45

multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#2 2010-08-23 06:48:09

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#3 2010-08-23 07:00:43

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#4 2010-08-23 08:52:39

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#5 2010-08-23 09:02:09

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#6 2010-08-23 13:32:51

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#7 2010-08-23 13:43:31

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#8 2010-08-23 13:50:15

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#9 2010-08-23 13:53:51

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#10 2010-08-23 14:30:09

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#11 2010-08-23 18:52:13

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#12 2010-08-23 19:00:55

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#13 2010-08-23 19:05:22

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#14 2010-08-23 21:17:47

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#15 2010-08-23 22:32:44

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#16 2010-08-23 23:32:42

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#17 2010-08-24 01:31:07

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#18 2010-08-24 02:21:26

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#19 2010-08-24 03:56:56

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#20 2010-08-25 09:18:48

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#21 2010-08-25 10:15:38

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#22 2010-08-25 18:03:05

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#23 2010-08-25 18:05:33

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#24 2010-08-25 18:10:44

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

#25 2010-08-26 11:56:18

Re: multilib repository: Feedback & Notification Thread

Board footer