[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: multiarch/bi-arch status (ETA) question

On 7/7/05, GOMBAS Gabor <gombasg@sztaki.hu> wrote:
> Well, Vmware runs just fine without any kind of chroot. 

Yes, I did get the test version of VMware running, but it was not
without issues.

> OOo also runs
> fine if you just _install_ it in a chroot but call it from the outside
> (well, you need to set a bunch of environment variables that point to
> the 32-bit gconv modules, 32-bit GTK theme, 32-bit GTK & Pango modules
> etc., and some bind mounts for /etc/openoffice and /usr/lib/openoffice
> that cannot be relocated by environment variables).

I wouldn't call that just fine. Setting the environment variables
means that you break any 64bit process that Openoffice might want to
spawn, which is a certain way to get really strange bugs. I bet that
printing using kprinter does not work, for example.

On the bright side: Ubuntu actually got Openoffice to work, mostly at
least. But they had to write some code for it, it seems.

> The only remaining problem is a "Locale not supported by the C library,
> falling back to C" message that I could not track down so far.

Does that mean you consider a system without localisation working? 

Coming from a country with a latin1 alphabet it is hard for me to
understand what it is like to use UTF8. But there are enough countries
where UTF8 is the only reasonable choice. Konsole for example is half
way broken, even in 3.4.

> So 32-bit apps seem to work without a chroot; you only need the chroot
> for package management.

I guess we wouldn't have the discussion if it did work, so I can only
conclude that the majority of users (and you only see the extreme
early adopters here) are of a different opinion.


Reply to: