[EPEL-devel] wine 32

[ToddAndMargo]

On 05/07/2015 06:17 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 06, 2015 06:53:54 PM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> On 6 May 2015 at 18:21, ToddAndMargo <ToddAndMargo at zoho.com> wrote:
>>> On 05/06/2015 09:31 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>>>> On 6 May 2015 at 00:28, ToddAndMargo <ToddAndMargo at zoho.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Kevin and EPEL,
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there any sign of EPEL 7 support for Wine 32 yet?  The
>>>>> lack of Wine 32 is keeping me on SL 6.6 and it is starting
>>>>> to drive me nuts!
>>>>>
>>>>> EPEL: think of the guilt you would feel if I get
>>>>> stuck in an insane asylums over the lack of wine 32
>>>>> support!  Seriously, the guilt would haunt you to the end
>>>>> of your days.  Okay, maybe not, but still ...
>>>>
>>>> Sadly it isn't possible in EPEL. There are not enough of the i686
>>>> libraries available to compile all the tools needed. It will require
>>>> people actually doing the work to making an i686 CentOS or Scientific
>>>> Linux but that only seems possible if the glibc/kernel/some other
>>>> tools are not the same as in x86_64 and it would require people to
>>>> actually do the work which no one has shown much effort in wanting to
>>>> do.
>>>
>>> Hi Steven,
>>>
>>> Does this help?
>>>
>>>      https://www.centos.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=49542
>>>
>>> Seems like most of the thinking has already been done.
>>
>> Not really. That works well for building it yourself and you should
>> follow those instructions for your own benefit. It doesn't work in our
>> build system for various reasons I can give hand-wavey answers to but
>> Dennis Gilmore or another Release Engineer could answer in depth if
>> you need. [And from my last asking about this.. it isn't something
>> that can be fixed simply.]
>
> a few issues, the biggest one is that koji enforces single arch in the
> buildroots. so we can only build i686 in a i686 chroot. since we do not have
> enough i686 content to enable building i686 its not possible that route.  the
> other way to try and do it would be to cross build the world so that we have
> x86_64 rpms with 32 bit content in them.  that would require exeptions to the
> packaging guidelines, and somoene to write new specs for every package needed
> and to get them through review.  in the end you would have to use a non rhel
> evironment and you would have say glibc32 openssl32 etc x86_64 rpms that means
> a massive support burden.  without Red Hat providing full 32 bit trees its
> just not a realistic option to support any 32 bit builds for epel7
>
> Dennis

Any sign of Red Hat changing their ways?  Or are they
just sick and tired of 32 bit?