[WBEL-users] Frustrations on x86_64

[Fernando Apesteguía]

Problem with OpenOffice is that doesn't exist x86_64 port (a lot of
problems porting some C++ code as they say in the web page). So the
faster solutions (at least, it was for me) is make yum to point to a
WBEL i386 repository and then

yum install openoffice.org

If you do this from a x86_64 repository, they will not solve some
dependencies. This is because openoffice for i386 depends on libraries
compiled for 386 and yum can't find them on the x86_64 repository.

Best regards!!!!

On 7/21/05, Daniel J. Summers <daniel at djs-consulting.com> wrote:
> Good evening.
> 
> I'm becoming quite frustrated with my WBEL 4 x86_64 install.  This isn't
> a slam on the product - I'm grateful for it, and I'm sure there's a
> critical piece of information that I'm missing that makes it really,
> really useful indeed (apologies to Thomas the Tank Engine).  Rather, the
> point of this is to ask for help, as I've researched this stuff and come
> up empty.
> 
> What is the trick to building things under this architecture?  Some
> packages bomb in the ./configure step.  Some compile fine, but if you
> use the --enable-shared=yes directive (as you have to, to use these with
> other things), gcc gripes about not being able to relocate a label (or
> something like that).  OpenOffice.org doesn't run, and the work-around,
> I've been told, is to install the i686 version too.  To me, this seems
> strange - is that what RH tells their folks?  The installer is a rebuild
> of RH's installer, so if it fails for us, surely it's also failing for
> them.  (Or is it?  Am I wrong to think that this is a kludgey fix?
> Should I download the oo.o source and try building it on my machine?)
> 
> Oddly enough, xine and xine-ui built perfectly - download the tarball,
> rpmbuild -ta, and install - good to go.  I'm even hosting these rpms on
> my website, and have had over 600 downloads in the past 2 months, with
> no one e-mailing me saying "hey, this crap didn't work!" - so they must
> be good.
> 
> I guess I'm just grasping at straws, trying to figure out what in the
> world the difference is (both between xine and something like liba52,
> and i686 and x86_64).  I ran WBEL 3 on an Athlon XP box fine for over a
> year, until the hardware began having stability issues.  And, I can tell
> that the 64-bit WBEL 4 runs the machine much more efficiently than the
> 32-bit Windows - I can tell that just by how much the fan comes on (or
> doesn't).
> 
> Maybe I'm missing the whole "shared module" concept - I'm trying to get
> transcode to work, and I've found x86_64 rpms for all requirements
> except two, and these are the two that gripe about not being able to
> relocate.
> 
> --
> *Daniel J. Summers*
> E-mail -        daniel at djs-consulting.com <mailto:daniel at djs-consulting.com>
> *Web Sites:*
> Business -      http://www.djs-consulting.com <http://www.djs-consulting.com/>
> Personal -      http://www.djs-consulting.com/personal
> <http://www.djs-consulting.com/personal/>
> 
> 
> GEEKCODE 3.12 GCS/IT d s-:+ a C++ L++ E--- W++ N++ o? K- w !O M--
> V PS+ PE++ Y? !PGP t+ 5? X+ R* tv b+ DI++ D+ G- e h---- r+++ y++++
> _______________________________________________
> Whitebox-users mailing list
> Whitebox-users at beau.org
> http://beau.org/mailman/listinfo/whitebox-users
>