On 12/07/2011 11:49 AM, 夜神 岩男 wrote: > On 12/08/2011 12:14 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> On 12/07/2011 09:09 AM, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> Lucian wrote: >>>> On 7 December 2011 14:03, Reynolds McClatchey<rey@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Any workaround or do I just need to use adobe on WinXP? >>>> >>>> Nobody should need to use windows. >>>> >>>> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=evince+password >>> >>> Or, least best answer, acroread runs jes' fine on Linux. >> >> except that they don't have an x86_64 version (unless it is fairly new) >> and I refuse to install i386 libraries to run acroread. > > Slight digression, but I always forget to ask this: > > Why are people so against installing 32-bit libraries? I've never > understood this -- some people even opt for virtualization of a 32-bit > release of their entire OS within which to run a few key 32-bit apps > instead of just installing the 32-bit compatibility libraries. > > What gives? Is there a technical argument against this? I am against it because it adds clutter that I don't want ... also, if I ever need to build anything on a machine with multi-lib it is very hard to control what the auto config/compile tools do. Then there are sometimes issues with the way RH does multi-lib ... the sharing of config and doc files. This sometimes causes issues. But, the overriding reason is, if I wanted to run i686 stuff, I would have installed the i686 distro :)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
