On 06/25/2010 03:46 AM, Jordi Sayol i Salomó wrote:

Many thanks for Your answer.

This rpm package is build for a i386 platform, and it's only installable
on a i386 system (without force it to), so the dependencies are for i386
installation. Of course It can be forced to install in another platform
as x86_64, alpha, arm, hppa, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc, etc.
but I cannot assure that the compiler will work on all of them.

Well, yeah, but from personal experience I can attest that dmd works fine on x86_64 (as does, like, every other 32 bit package), and dmd works fine with 64 bit gcc. at least on my install (fedora 13 - what do you use?).

You talk
about the glibc-devel package, but this is not the only one needed by
the compiler, dmd also needs gcc (32 bits) and in Your rpm (as in mine)
do not specifies anything about arch, also there is a missing library on
Your rpm, libgcc_s.so.1 is needed too by dmd.

Really? The gcc dependency doesn't automatically bring in libgcc? Is that what the GCCVER2 business is about?


One solution for this problem is to explain the trick needed to install
the ix86 dmd rpm package on a x86_64 system, as Walter has done with the
same situation for the dmd deb package,
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/dmd-linux.html#installation

The trick for doing this on fedora 86_64 is just

yum install gcc glibc-devel.i686

and then putting dmd wherever. Works fine.


Another one is to create a x86_64 rpm package of dmd 32 bits compiler. I
don't like this solution because when dmd 64 bits appears in the near
future, this will be a source of confusion.

yeah, don't do that.


And My preferred solution, create a i386 chroot machine inside Your
x86_64 system, install dmd package on it and compile Yours D programs on
it too.

I've never found a need to do this (and I also don't know how).


I apologize for my bad English.

Best regards,

Reply via email to