Re: Broken applications: Could we be honest?
On 7/12/06, Art Edwards <email@example.com> wrote:
> Did you send bugreports for those programs?
It turns out that the bugs are present in FC 5 as well.
Then it is one more reason to file a bugreport.
I have to say that
I found this to be an unsatisfying solution. Part of the reason I moved to
FC for the time being is that they haven't used the chroot, so that it is
possible, for instance, to run a 32-bit firefox that can see the entire
You can bind mount _any_ file system visible on the 64-bit side, into
#mount -o bind,ro / /var/chroot/sid-ia32/mnt/pure64
This is useful for looking at the html documentation. Now, I could
install a complete second version, but this seems a bit perverse.
No need to install 2nd version, just bind mount what you need in the chroot.
I'm sure this will
fall on deaf ears, but I don't think that the pure-64 choice made by debian was appropriate
at this time. The virtue of AMD64 is that it CAN execute the 32-bit executables transparently,
implying that there shouldn't be a sequestering of these executables and their associated libraries,
except, perhaps, in their own directories.
A 32-bit application needs 32-bit libs, it can't run with 64-bit libs.
There are some plans for multiarch, but they won't make it into etch.
[Although it would be nice to have it asap].
There were also some discussion of problems that might appear if you
install the same app, both 64-bit and 32-bit. Now where was that
A long thread that talks about this: