[clug] Virtualisation solution for development
duncan_roe at acslink.net.au
Wed Jun 22 04:34:01 MDT 2011
I used to run a 64/32 system with really no problem (except the time to keep
both sets of software up to date). I put 64-bit libraries in /lib64 and
/usr/lib64, and kept /usr/local all 32-bit (it was --bind mounted from the
ld-linux.so has no problem working out whether to load 32-bit or 64-bit .so
when both exist under their respective directories. Eventually I got lazy and
reverted to the 32-bit partition for everything. Now Slackware releases
64-bit, I might go back to the mixed system (they've done a good job of making
packages that co-exist).
Cheers ... Duncan.
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 05:16:48PM +1000, Ben Nizette wrote:
> Hi All,
> For the last several months I've been trying to keep 32-bit and 64-bit
> development files playing nicely together on my Ubuntu 64-bit dev box. Each
> time I find a new, dumb, 32-bit, proprietary package I spend ages creating a
> set of $PATH, $LD_LIBRARY_PATH and symlinks that will actually get the stupid
> thing to run. And those then break my finely tuned environment for the other
> stupid packages. I've started creating scripts that set up a good
> environment, run the program, then tear it down again but that's getting
> tedious, I've had enough.
> My first instinct was just to grab VirtualBox and install a 32-bit machine but
> surely there's a better, lighter-weight way! Especially as many of the stupid
> packages have to talk to host hardware, eg programmers, which aren't
> completely trivial to punch through a VM.
> I've had a brief look at OpenVZ but it looks like when they say 'same OS
> workloads' they really mean it; I thought they could support parallel
> distributions so long as they were all Linux-based but it looks like I was
> Anyone got ideas? Done the same thing?
> linux mailing list
> linux at lists.samba.org
Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
More information about the linux