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 * *************************************************************