On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 10:22:09 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > No, I was missing the *whole* of the 32bit fs /lib directory. O_O
>
> Oops. I wasn't going to own up to this, but a week or two ago I managed
> to wipe out my entire /lib64 directory with some careless
> copy-and-pasting. I couldn't
On Monday 01 Aug 2016 18:57:53 Mick wrote:
> On Monday 01 Aug 2016 17:32:58 Mick wrote:
--->8
> > Am I missing something in the amd64 kernel to be able to execute 32bit
> > code?
> No, I was missing the *whole* of the 32bit fs /lib directory. O_O
Oops. I wasn't going to own up to this, but a we
On Tuesday 02 Aug 2016 00:33:57 waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 01:11:24AM +0200, Jeremi Piotrowski wrote
>
> > Does it make sense to compile your own versions of these packages
> > and then binary merge, when portage already contains binary ebuilds
> > for these packages? (
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 01:11:24AM +0200, Jeremi Piotrowski wrote
> Does it make sense to compile your own versions of these packages
> and then binary merge, when portage already contains binary ebuilds
> for these packages? (firefox-bin/libreoffice-bin/google-chrome)
I've got an underpowered
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 10:21:20PM +0100, Mick wrote:
>
> I think libreoffice, chromium and firefox will be compiled in a chroot from
> now
> on and then emerged as binaries. This is the difference for libreoffice:
>
> Sat Aug 29 06:09:09 2015 >>> app-office/libreoffice-4.4.4.3
>m
On Monday 01 Aug 2016 18:57:53 Mick wrote:
> On Monday 01 Aug 2016 17:32:58 Mick wrote:
> > On Monday 01 Aug 2016 12:19:41 waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
> > > > What chroot() actually does is fairly simple, it modifies pathname
> > > > lookups for a process and its children so that any reference to
On Monday 01 Aug 2016 17:32:58 Mick wrote:
> On Monday 01 Aug 2016 12:19:41 waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
> > > What chroot() actually does is fairly simple, it modifies pathname
> > > lookups for a process and its children so that any reference to a path
> > > starting '/' will effectively have th
On Monday 01 Aug 2016 12:19:41 waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 04:46:24PM +0100, Mick wrote
>
> > On Monday 01 Aug 2016 11:23:03 waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
> > > I recommend going with one of 3 "cheats"...
> > >
> > > 1) A 32-bit chroot in a 64-bit machine
> > >
> > >
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 04:46:24PM +0100, Mick wrote
> On Monday 01 Aug 2016 11:23:03 waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
>
> > I recommend going with one of 3 "cheats"...
> >
> > 1) A 32-bit chroot in a 64-bit machine
> >
> > 2) A QEMU (or VirtualBox) 32-bit guest on a 64-bit host
> >
> > 3) If you
On Monday 01 Aug 2016 11:23:03 waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
> I recommend going with one of 3 "cheats"...
>
> 1) A 32-bit chroot in a 64-bit machine
>
> 2) A QEMU (or VirtualBox) 32-bit guest on a 64-bit host
>
> 3) If you have a spare 64-bit machine, install 32-bit Gentoo on it
>
> I use
10 matches
Mail list logo
