The installer *asks* if 32-bit libs are wanted or not. It's strictly optional.
yes well.. distributions like gentoo does NOT use the normal installer, this is not really an issue, this is all just because the gentoo maintainer of fglrx seems really determined to block the install of fglrx on a configuration "not supported" by amd.
Bump for gręt justice.
It's July 2009 and nothing has changed on either side. Bridgman, get a move on!
I'd rather recommend you to file a bug on it since the phrasing on http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownloa...5&lang=English "32-Bit packages must be installed for 64-Bit Linux drivers to install or work." counts as a release documentation bug if the driver works even without the 32-bit part. If you file it, I'm sure the people responsible for developing fglrx will take a look at it after the armada of high-priority bugs are solved... http://ati.cchtml.com/
Psst, they're not 32bit emulation libraries. An x86_64 CPU can natively run 32bit code just fine.
"When running on a 64-bit Linux system Catalyst needs to have the kernel configured for 32-bit emulation support and several 32-bit userspace dependencies have to be installed for running 32-bit programs. ATi does not currently officially support running the driver on non-multilib 64-bit Linux platforms." would be more accurate. It also clarifies that users running it on a 64-bit "pure" environment are solely responsible for testing and compatibility of the driver there.
Thanks. Looks like this might be a (well intentioned) over-reaction to a not-sufficiently-clear message on our web site. The issue here does seem to be the one I mentioned above -- running 32-bit apps on a 64-bit system needs our 32-bit GL libs, and those in turn require 32-bit libs in the OS. From the second bug report link :
The question seems to be whether it is better to mask off fglrx on any gentoo 64-bit system that does not have the 32-bit libs (just in case someone runs a 32-bit app and has problems) or whether it is better to let the fglrx driver install so users who understand the 32/64-bit issues can go ahead but limit themselves to running 64-bit apps.
I don't have a good understanding re: how many of the common Linux apps are available (and used) in 64-bit packages. If it's highly likely that a typical user *is* going to need to run 32-bit apps then maybe requiring a multilib gentoo system is the best option.
Is there anything I'm missing here ? I haven't had much experience playing with 32 vs 64 bit systems yet. Is there maybe a non-obvious downside to including the 32-bit libs ? Until now I figured anyone with a 64-bit system would include them "just in case", so they didn't have to go back and add them later when the inevitable 32-bit-only app showed up.
BTW I wasn't sure how to interpret "upstream" -- is "upstream" AMD in this case ?
It's not really a problem in Gentoo, right now I'm running a multilib Gentoo system, but the only 32-bit code is Steam which I'm running under WINE. Every Linux native application was compiled by source from the Paludis package manager, one of the optional package managers in Gentoo, so the only case I'd ever run into a 32-bit application is one where the source isn't available or if it was programmed in assembly like some game emulators. Haven't run into any other issues since Flash 10 finally went 64-bit last year.