I tried a bit ago to compile D programs on my computer, under Linux - which I upgraded to a 64 bit machine.  This didn't work.  I thought I could at least get a 32 bit executable, but it had linking errors.  I was able to fix these, but each fix only revealed a further obstacle - I stopped when I got to pthreads, which I couldn't find a 32 bit version of (I suspect I could build one, but I have no idea what other libs I would be missing at that point.)

I was surprised, when I tried under WinXP and it worked - I assumed this is because it doesn't do 64 bits yet?

In any case, has anyone figured out how to build code on a 64 bit machine?  If it's completely impossible for now, I'm okay with that, I just don't want to climb the mountain if there's nothing at the top.

If noone knows, I can try again and report what I did and give more details.

(P.S. the previous try was with a D compiler that was several versions back.)

Thanks,
Kevin

Kevin Bealer wrote:
> I tried a bit ago to compile D programs on my computer, under Linux - which I
> upgraded to a 64 bit machine.  This didn't work.  I thought I could at least get
> a 32 bit executable, but it had linking errors.  I was able to fix these, but
> each fix only revealed a further obstacle - I stopped when I got to pthreads,
> which I couldn't find a 32 bit version of (I suspect I could build one, but I
> have no idea what other libs I would be missing at that point.)
> 
> I was surprised, when I tried under WinXP and it worked - I assumed this is
> because it doesn't do 64 bits yet?
> 
> In any case, has anyone figured out how to build code on a 64 bit machine?  If
> it's completely impossible for now, I'm okay with that, I just don't want to
> climb the mountain if there's nothing at the top.

Are you using a 32 or 64 bit kernel?  Using an AMD-64 all by itself should affect things--it's the OS that matters.  I'm not sure about other changes, but the pthread stuff shouldn't be too difficult to fix, as that is all declared in std/thread.d--simply add "version(x86_64)" blocks where appropriate.


Sean

In article <dsr2jl$4n0$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Sean Kelly says...
>
>Kevin Bealer wrote:
>> I tried a bit ago to compile D programs on my computer, under Linux - which I upgraded to a 64 bit machine.  This didn't work.  I thought I could at least get a 32 bit executable, but it had linking errors.  I was able to fix these, but each fix only revealed a further obstacle - I stopped when I got to pthreads, which I couldn't find a 32 bit version of (I suspect I could build one, but I have no idea what other libs I would be missing at that point.)
>> 
>> I was surprised, when I tried under WinXP and it worked - I assumed this is because it doesn't do 64 bits yet?
>> 
>> In any case, has anyone figured out how to build code on a 64 bit machine?  If it's completely impossible for now, I'm okay with that, I just don't want to climb the mountain if there's nothing at the top.
>
>Are you using a 32 or 64 bit kernel?  Using an AMD-64 all by itself should affect things--it's the OS that matters.  I'm not sure about other changes, but the pthread stuff shouldn't be too difficult to fix, as that is all declared in std/thread.d--simply add "version(x86_64)" blocks where appropriate.
>
>
>Sean

I'm using a 64 bit kernel, Linux Ubuntu.  I tried this again with the latest version, and it had an error, but I can work around it.

I don't think I could have just missed this before;  I don't know if Ubuntu has upgraded their libraries, or D has changed, but somehow it works now:

It seems like what I need to do to compile is:

dmd -c hello.d
gcc hello.o -o hi -lphobos -lpthread -lm -m32

I don't know how to specify the "-m32" to dmd - passing as a link flag doesn't seem to work, but I can build binaries again, hurrah!  In any case, the last time I looked at this (a month or 3 ago), I spend many hours with libraries with no success (at that time).

Thanks,
Kevin

A 64-bit Linux system should be able to run 32-bit binaries as long as it has the 32-bit versions of the libraries to link to (both the static libraries and dynamic).  I'm not sure about Ubuntu, but I know Gentoo 64-bit provides 32-bit libraries.

You should be able to send -m32 to the gcc linker using -L-m32 .  You may also want to check out gdc.  It may be able to generate 64-bit code, although I'm not sure.

I don't have a 64-bit box (yet) so I'm not sure how much help that was, but in theory it should be possible.

BTW, I think the reason there aren't any issues with Windows in because Windows doesn't use 64-bit anything, just 32.  They may have upgraded since I last heard, however.

~John Demme

Kevin Bealer wrote:

> I tried a bit ago to compile D programs on my computer, under Linux -
> which I
> upgraded to a 64 bit machine.  This didn't work.  I thought I could at
> least get
> a 32 bit executable, but it had linking errors.  I was able to fix these,
> but each fix only revealed a further obstacle - I stopped when I got to
> pthreads, which I couldn't find a 32 bit version of (I suspect I could
> build one, but I have no idea what other libs I would be missing at that
> point.)
> 
> I was surprised, when I tried under WinXP and it worked - I assumed this is because it doesn't do 64 bits yet?
> 
> In any case, has anyone figured out how to build code on a 64 bit machine?
>  If it's completely impossible for now, I'm okay with that, I just don't
> want to climb the mountain if there's nothing at the top.
> 
> If noone knows, I can try again and report what I did and give more details.
> 
> (P.S. the previous try was with a D compiler that was several versions
> back.)
> 
> Thanks,
> Kevin

Kevin Bealer schrieb am 2006-02-14:
> In article <dsr2jl$4n0$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Sean Kelly says...
>>
>>Kevin Bealer wrote:
>>> I tried a bit ago to compile D programs on my computer, under Linux - which I upgraded to a 64 bit machine.  This didn't work.  I thought I could at least get a 32 bit executable, but it had linking errors.  I was able to fix these, but each fix only revealed a further obstacle - I stopped when I got to pthreads, which I couldn't find a 32 bit version of (I suspect I could build one, but I have no idea what other libs I would be missing at that point.)
>>> 
>>> I was surprised, when I tried under WinXP and it worked - I assumed this is because it doesn't do 64 bits yet?
>>> 
>>> In any case, has anyone figured out how to build code on a 64 bit machine?  If it's completely impossible for now, I'm okay with that, I just don't want to climb the mountain if there's nothing at the top.
>>
>>Are you using a 32 or 64 bit kernel?  Using an AMD-64 all by itself should affect things--it's the OS that matters.  I'm not sure about other changes, but the pthread stuff shouldn't be too difficult to fix, as that is all declared in std/thread.d--simply add "version(x86_64)" blocks where appropriate.
>>
>>
>>Sean
>
> I'm using a 64 bit kernel, Linux Ubuntu.  I tried this again with the latest version, and it had an error, but I can work around it.
>
> I don't think I could have just missed this before;  I don't know if Ubuntu has upgraded their libraries, or D has changed, but somehow it works now:
>
> It seems like what I need to do to compile is:
>
> dmd -c hello.d
> gcc hello.o -o hi -lphobos -lpthread -lm -m32
>
> I don't know how to specify the "-m32" to dmd - passing as a link flag doesn't seem to work, but I can build binaries again, hurrah!  In any case, the last time I looked at this (a month or 3 ago), I spend many hours with libraries with no success (at that time).
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin

I am using dmd on AMD-64 with Gentoo with the following setup:

1) 32bit emulation libs:
emul-linux-x86-baselibs-2.3
emul-linux-x86-compat-1.0
emul-linux-x86-glibc-1000

2) gcc wraper: /opt/dmd/bin/gcc
#!/bin/bash
gcc -m32 $*

3) changed path, so that dmd uses the gcc script PATH=/opt/dmd/bin/:$PATH dmd somesource.d

Thomas

Thanks;  I tried this, but using -Xlinker, I get this:

/usr/bin/ld: unrecognised emulation mode: 32
Supported emulations: elf_i386 i386linux
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

It seems like "-m32" needs to go to the compiler phase, even when just linking the code.  I don't know exactly why, though.  Maybe there is glue code *between* the library and application that needs to be 32 or 64.

It might be simple for dmd to automatically provide the -m32 option, but of course the user will need all the 32 bit versions of things too (which I have, but which will not be standard on most 64 bit systems I think).

In any case, it all works for me now.

BTW, Walter, great idea on the -run option, I've always thought D was only inches from being a great scripting language.

Kevin


In article <dsrmje$m91$1@digitaldaemon.com>, John Demme says...
>
>A 64-bit Linux system should be able to run 32-bit binaries as long as it has the 32-bit versions of the libraries to link to (both the static libraries and dynamic).  I'm not sure about Ubuntu, but I know Gentoo 64-bit provides 32-bit libraries.
>
>You should be able to send -m32 to the gcc linker using -L-m32 .  You may also want to check out gdc.  It may be able to generate 64-bit code, although I'm not sure.
>
>I don't have a 64-bit box (yet) so I'm not sure how much help that was, but in theory it should be possible.
>
>BTW, I think the reason there aren't any issues with Windows in because Windows doesn't use 64-bit anything, just 32.  They may have upgraded since I last heard, however.
>
>~John Demme
>
>Kevin Bealer wrote:
>
>> I tried a bit ago to compile D programs on my computer, under Linux -
>> which I
>> upgraded to a 64 bit machine.  This didn't work.  I thought I could at
>> least get
>> a 32 bit executable, but it had linking errors.  I was able to fix these,
>> but each fix only revealed a further obstacle - I stopped when I got to
>> pthreads, which I couldn't find a 32 bit version of (I suspect I could
>> build one, but I have no idea what other libs I would be missing at that
>> point.)
>> 
>> I was surprised, when I tried under WinXP and it worked - I assumed this is because it doesn't do 64 bits yet?
>> 
>> In any case, has anyone figured out how to build code on a 64 bit machine?
>>  If it's completely impossible for now, I'm okay with that, I just don't
>> want to climb the mountain if there's nothing at the top.
>> 
>> If noone knows, I can try again and report what I did and give more details.
>> 
>> (P.S. the previous try was with a D compiler that was several versions
>> back.)
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Kevin
>