Multilib, the hard way?

Ken Moffat ken at linuxfromscratch.org
Fri Nov 25 16:58:27 PST 2005


On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Ryan Twitchell wrote:

> So now that I've got my shiny new x86_64 system up and running as purely 
> 64-bit (with much thanks to all the LFS contributors), I've decided that it 
> might be useful to have just one thing implemented 32-bit. Wine.
>

>
> Can anyone suggest other packages it might be wise to install or any 
> subtleties I may have missed.
>

  I don't claim to be an expert in these things (it's taken me 5 or 6 
weeks to install a 32-bit firefox (and plugins) on a multilib system, 
and it will probably take me another 5 weeks to document it 8-( ) but if 
you really want to run 32-bit software, why don't you just build 
multilib ? [ yeah, I know, adding --libdir=/usr/lib64 is a PITA ]

  The only obvious dependency (from looking at the winehq pages, and 
failing to find a list of dependencies) is X.  I have zero experience of 
trying to use a 32-bit X in a non-standard directory (although it does 
sound attractive - I like 32-bit browser plugins, but I don't trust 
them), but you will need 32-bit X libraries, and for those you'll need 
32-bit png, expat, fontconfig, freetype.

  In my multilib build, I stick these in /usr/lib and /usr/X11R6/lib 
before putting the "regular" versions in lib64.  I don't see why you 
can't just put the native 32-bit versions somewhere else (using DESTDIR 
for X, perhaps - I think Tushar said a long while ago on blfs that he 
uses this to put X in /usr), but I've not tried it.

  If wine needs any toolkits, you'll also need to build those, and sort 
out pkgconfig (PKG_CONFIG_PATH if only the 32-bit programs are 
accessible), LDFLAGS ( '-L /wherever/lib' ) for libtool libraries.

Ken
-- 
  das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce


More information about the cross-lfs mailing list