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, <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
Sergi Reyner wrote:
2014-03-03 9:21 GMT+00:00 Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek@gmail.com>:
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