On 06/10/2012 17:52, Walter Dnes wrote: > In other words, all or nothing. An x32 distro is technically > possible, but it would require every last single binary/library/object > file/etc *INCLUDING PROPRIETARY PROGRAMS AND BINARY BLOBS* to be x32 and > only, and no multilib stuff. If amd64 did not support multilib and > plugin-wrappers, it would be a lot less common today.
Sec, let me not be misunderstood. You can _still_ have multilib. And you could still devise plugin wrappers. But things like nspluginwrapper works only by chance with the design. If it was easy to do, we wouldn't _need_ multilib to begin with. In this case the problem is that Chrome uses v8 internally, and getting it to use a different ABI library is likely more cumbersome than porting and maintaining sid port. For reference, what Ben referred to is all described in http://blog.flameeyes.eu/tag/x32 . It's also interesting to note that Werner Koch of libgcrypt and gnupg fame is also not interested in supporting x32. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes [email protected] — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
