Re: x86_64 vs i386
On Monday 21 March 2016 17:09:52 Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Monday 21 March 2016 12:08:15 The Wanderer wrote:
> > On 2016-03-21 at 11:54, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > On Monday 21 March 2016 10:50:33 Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > >>> But now all the browser coders have thrown i386 machines under
> > >>> the bus, and I'm apparently stuck with the broken i386 stuff
> > >>> left behind.
> > >>
> > >> What do you mean by that?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Stefan "who still uses 32bit userland pretty much everywhere"
> > >
> > > You haven't noticed there have been no updates to the 32 bit stuff
> > > in quite a while?
> > Where?
> > You confirmed in another mail that you're referring (at least in
> > part) to the chromium package, and to an apparent decision by Google
> > upstream to drop 32-bit support in Chrome. (I haven't heard of this
> > elsewhere AFAIK, but it wouldn't entirely surprise me.)
> > The version of chromium:i386 in testing is the same as the version
> > of chromium:amd64 in testing (49.0.2623.87-1), and the chromium
> > binary from the latter package is timestamped March 9th, so it's
> > less than two weeks old.
> > Am I looking in the wrong places, or do we just have significantly
> > different definitions of "quite a while"?
> No, its far more likely that because this system says its a 32 bit
> system, google is refusing to show me the amd64 version. But I need ti
> figure out how to re-install the 32 bit iceweasel because thats what
> my bank expects, unless someone can tell me how to import the
> iceweasel saved site list and passwds into Chromium.
> Cheers, Gene Heskett
PS: That problem is solved, I found dpkg's arch file & nuked the amd64
entry. iceweasel is now reinstalled and all my links and pws are
Cheers, Gene Heskett
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>