[Fwd: Re: Compiling on 64 bit SuSE (Was Re: List OK?)]

[Dan Black]

On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 23:37 -0700, Des Dougan wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 00:04 -0400, Dan Black wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 20:44 -0400, Robert Heller wrote:
> > >   Des Dougan <des at douganconsulting.com>,
> > >   In a message on Mon, 05 Sep 2005 16:30:45 -0700, wrote :
> > > 
> > > DD> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> > > DD> From: Des Dougan <des at DouganConsulting.com>
> > > DD> To: Maf. King <maf at chilwell.net>
> > > DD> Subject: Re: Compiling on 64 bit SuSE (Was Re: List OK?)
> > > DD> Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:52:06 -0700
> > > DD> 
> > > DD> On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 23:47 +0100, Maf. King wrote:
> > > DD> > Hi Des,
> > > DD> > 
> > > DD> > Just to add a couple of cents - I'm in a similar position at the moment, 
> > > DD> > trying to get a CAD-viewer app to build on my first x86_64 box (SuSE 9.3), 
> > > DD> > and I feel that you might get more mileage out of trying to build GC as a 32 
> > > DD> > bit app.
> > > DD> > 
> > > DD> > It is what I intend to try next (when I get time)- force everything "down" to 
> > > DD> > 32 bit, which seems not to be the intended SuSE way, as the /*/lib64 
> > > DD> > directories seem to be preferred....
> > > DD> 
> > > DD> Maf.,
> > > DD> 
> > > DD> I'm willing to try that. How does the force to 32 bit happen? Is it the
> > > DD> --build configure option that does this?
> > > 
> > > Well, you need to install the 32-bit compiler, the 32-bit bintools, and
> > > all of the 32-bit -devel rpms.  And then you won't be able to build
> > > any 64-bit applications.  You might as well just install the 32-bit
> > > version of Suse, in which case you might just as well just toss the
> > > 64-bit processors and get 32-bit ones....
> > > 
> > 
> > I've run SuSE 9.2 x86_64 in the past.  If I remember correctly, you can
> > install both 64 bit and 32 bit versions of gcc and you would have gcc
> > (64 bit) and gcc32.  So you can compile 64 bit and 32 bit apps on the
> > same box.
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> Thanks for your message. looking at what I have installed, it seems SuSE
> installs both versions:
> 
> # rpm -qa | grep gcc
> gcc-3.3.5-5.1
> libgcc-3.3.5-5.1
> gcc-c++-3.3.5-5.1
> gcc-32bit-9.3-7.1
> gcc-info-3.3.5-5.1
> 
> My problem is how to tell gnucash to use 32 bit, if I'm unable to get
> the 64 bit version to work.
> 

I think you can use the CC=gcc-32bit (or whatever the actual name of the
gcc 32bit file) on the configure commmand line.  


> Regards,
> 
> Des
> 
> > > At least that is my understanding.  From the messages, it looks like
> > > Suse is just like RHEL 3.0 / WBL 3.0 (which is what we have at UMass). 
> > > 32-bit applications, built on 32-bit system run on the 64-bit system,
> > > but you can't (in any trivial way) built 32-bit applications on the
> > > 64-bit box.  Not that there is any real need to do so -- we have plenty
> > > of 'matching' 32-bit boxes (all running WBL 3.0, just like the x86_64).
> > > I don't think you really want to use a 64-bit system to build 32-bit
> > > applications.  You might be able to create a 'cross-build' sort of
> > > environment, but that is somewhat non-trivial as well.
> > > 
> > > DD> 
> > > DD> Thanks for your feedback,
> > > DD> 
> > > DD> Des
> > > DD> -- 
> > > DD> 
> > > DD> Des Dougan, Principal
> > > DD> Dougan Consulting Group
> > > DD> 
> > > DD> Ph: 604-980-2848       Email: des at DouganConsulting dot com     
> > > DD> 
> > > DD>         www.DouganConsulting.com
> > > DD> 
> > > DD> Design - Implementation - Support
> > > DD> 

-- 
Dan Black <philippines at charter.net>