"If you're running newer hardware, there are some definite advantages to installing a 64-bit operating system. But, if you still need to run any 32-bit applications, you'll need to have the 32-bit support libraries installed. Different Linux distros handle this in different ways. For 64-bit Ubuntu, finding the proper 32-bit support packages is a simple matter of opening up the Synaptic Package Manager, and searching for the string 'ia32'. With 64-bit openSuSE, 32-bit support is already built-in, so you don't have to do anything. With Fedora, though, it's a whole different story. Not only are the 32-bit packages not already installed, the Fedora folk don't provide any documentation on how to install them. The directions I found via Google were outdated, and wouldn't work. I finally resolved the problem by sking a Red Hat employee in my local Linux Users Group."
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-26
Isn't it much easier to just yum install packagename.i386 (or i586 in Fedora 11 and i686 in Fedora 12)? I have never had to deal with any of the issues mentioned in the article and I run 64bit arch since like 5 years. If I want to install e.g acrobat reader I just simply download the 32bit rpm from Adobe site, double-click it and PackageKit installs all needed 32bit dependencies..
Member since:2009-04-08
Member since:
2005-07-06
I must admit that I wonder if anyone @OSNews is actually reading the articles that are being linked.
Fedora has been multi-lib complaint (as in x86_64 + i386) since the first x86_64 Fedora release. (2?)
For instance, Fedora's 64bit tree includes a large number of i386 (i586 optimized) applications and libraries:
$ yum list | grep i586 | wc -l
3756
If you require, say, Wine (a 32bit application), you simple type (or select within Add/Remove applications):
$ yum install wine
Say you want a certain 32bit library and all of it's dependencies:
$ yum install glib2.i586
If anything, Fedora has a -far- better multi-lib system compared to other distributions. (RPM has built in arch support)
etc, etc.
I'd consider taking this article down.
- Gilboa
Member since:2008-08-25
Member since:2005-10-12
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2008-10-04
It's news about an operating system, the place for it is OSNews
Sure beats reading about Ikea! "
Even if the article is written by an incompetent dofus like most of the OSNews articles have been for the past 4 years or so, especially the Free Software/Open Source/Linux ones?
Member since:2005-07-24
Member since:2005-08-11
Member since:2005-07-06
A. I have read the article.
B. As for the issue at hand...
Next, add the 32-bit libraries by copying the following list, and pasting it into a text file. Save it as “Fedora-ia32.txt”."
Could have simply been achieved by calling:
$ yum install SDL.i586...
(Or by selecting SDL.i586 in add/remove programs.)
- Gilboa
Edited 2009-09-06 07:47 UTC
Member since:2007-04-06
Member since:2005-07-24
One thing that I have run into is that "32 bit support" covers only the most popular libs. Less popular libs are not included in the standard 32 bit support for 64 bit distros I've used. And by "less popular" I'm talking about things like SDL-PulseAudio. Grrr...
Edited 2009-09-06 17:52 UTC
Member since:
2009-07-01
I can say that, as in FC6 I tried installing the 64 bit version and get annoyed with the quantity o 32 bit libraries installed.
At the time I tough it was something that I made wrongly. Did not notice that 32 bit apps needed 32 bit libs and then I get same libs in 64 and 32 bits. Only a week after I realized, but was already reinstalled as 32 bit OS.
