I do have Pharo running in CentOS 64 bits since a few months already. The way I installed dependencies was:
sudo yum install libX11.i686 libX11-devel.i686 mesa-libGL.i686 mesa-libGL-devel.i686 And then since I was using Zodiac: sudo yum install openssl098e.i686 openssl.i686 sudo cp /usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.8e /usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.8 ldd /opt/pharo/pharoVM/libSqueakSSL.so On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 7:53 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Sergi Reyner wrote: > > 2014-03-03 9:21 GMT+00:00 Pavel Krivanek <[email protected]>: > > A few weeks ago, I wanted to quickly update the pharo in my VPS which > runs my IRC bot. > > Cent0S 6.5 (and others) cannot use latest VM from get.pharo.org because >> of different glibc version. >> > > Fedora, Debian, OpenSuSE, Mint, CentOS, even older Ubuntus... after > going throught the list of available distros and installing every one of > them, I was left with two choices for setting up Pharo in my VPS: Gentoo > and the latest Ubuntu. I did not want to install Ubuntu in the first place > because of their policy of "latest of some things, and obsolete versions of > something else" which has bitten me time and again. But I did install it, > because I had even less interest in maintaning a remote gentoo. > > So you have to compile the VM on your own. This is a (probably >> incomplete) set of the packages you will need for this task on 64-bit >> system: >> > > Wouldn´t it be better for everyone to have Pharo compiled against an > "older" Glibc, for example, debian´s one, so it can run on more > distributions than "latest ubuntu"? From my point of view, asking people to > compile their own VMs doesn´t seem to foster usability. > > Cheers, > Sergi > > Would statically linking Linux PharoVM against optimal 32-bit glibc make > things easier for users? What would be the file size penalty and are there > other issues to consider? File size is less of an issue than it used to > be. > cheers -ben > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
