On 2011-03-27 13:20, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 2011-03-27 21:24, Ishan Thilina wrote: > > @Jacob: > > > > An error comes when the " ./dvm install dvm" command is given. > > > > " > > ./dvm: error while loading shared libraries: libz.so.1: cannot open > > shared object file: No such file or directory > > You don't have libz installed? Oh, you're running 64bit, you need to > install 32bit libraries. I also forgot to mention that DVM currently > only installs the 32bit version of DMD. The 64bit version is quite new, > don't know if it's experimental, alpha or beta.
Probably alpha. I believe that it mostly works, but there are still plenty of bugs to find, I'm sure. However, depending on what you mean by "installing" the compiler, there is no 32-bit vs 64-bit version. Only the libraries differ. There is only a 32-bit binary for the compiler, and you pass it -m64 if you want it to compile 64-bit binaries. So, if your tool deals with the compiler only, then 32-bit vs 64-bit is currently a moot point. On the other hand, if it deals with the standard libraries too (as it probably does), then 32-bit vs 64-bit _is_ an issue, but it isn't an issue for the compiler itself. And unless you're not using the standard dmd.conf as part of switching compilers, there would already be a difference in the library layout once 64-bit compilation was introduced, since the 32-bit Phobos was moved from dmd2/linux/lib to dmd2/linux/lib32 (with the 64-bit version in dmd2/linux/lib64). And if you made the lib32 change, then having it work with 64-bit is likely trivial. And if you didn't make such a change, you're going to have to eventually. Personally, I don't see tha alpha quality of the 64-bit code generation to be a reason not to support it. It's been released. But then again, I don't use your tool at all and find no need for it, so it's not like I'm one of your users. - Jonathan M Davis