They don't ignore anything, they don't have it for 64-bit and are expecting 
their application to run in compatibility mode without any 64-bit stuff 
provided with the app. For me this is a reasonable expectation.

Michel

--On jeudi 26 avril 2007 09:54 -0500 "Marc W. Mengel" <[log in to unmask]> 
wrote:

>
> I think the issue that folks are concerned about is that they have a
> package which is a combination of:
>     platform-independant python/perl code
>     binary loadable python/perl module (.so file)
> which they cannot run on the 64-bit perl/python because they only have
> a 32-bit .so file.
>
> They seem to be ignoring the possiblity of shipping .so files for
> all of the platforms they want to be able run on -- that is you could
> have the ix86, the x86_64, and maybe sparc_solaris versions of the .so
> with your package so that you could run it all three places...
>
> Marc
>
> Jaroslaw Polok wrote:
>> Hi Michel
>>
>> I still fail to understand what problem are you trying
>> to solve here ....:
>>
>> Either the application in question can be ported to
>> 64 bit (so no problem ..) or not: then why to run it
>> on an 64 bit system in first place ?
>>
>> SL exists in both 32 and 64 bit variants ...
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Jarek
>>
>> __
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> _ Jaroslaw_Polok ___________________ CERN - IT/FIO/LA _
>> _ http://home.cern.ch/~jpolok ___ tel_+41_22_767_1834 _
>> _____________________________________ +41_78_792_0795 _
>



     *************************************************************
     * Michel Jouvin                 Email : [log in to unmask] *
     * LAL / CNRS                    Tel : +33 1 64468932        *
     * B.P. 34                       Fax : +33 1 69079404        *
     * 91898 Orsay Cedex                                         *
     * France                                                    *
     *************************************************************