chmod+x Wrote: > dsimcha Wrote: > > > == Quote from Jesse Phillips (jessekphillip...@gmail.com)'s article > > > Lutger Wrote: > > > > You need the i686 versions of some packages, probably start with libgcc > > > > (yum > > > > install libgcc.i686) and glibc, I don't remember which exactly are > > > > required. I > > > > have dmd running on 64 bit fedora just fine, it can work. There is also > > > > a 64-bit > > > > dmd in the making which should solve all those problems. > > > Based on a previous post by Walter, it sounds like he is working on just > > > the > > code generation for 64bit and does not see a need to make the compiler 64 > > bit itself. > > > > The compiler already has been compilable as a 64-bit binary for months. > > IMHO, > > though, Walter should release a 64-bit pre-compiled binary to make life > > easy for > > ppl with 64-bit installs. > > Another source of misery are the contents of the dmd zip file. Every time you > need to set +x flag for the executable. This is so ridiculous. Does the > Creator accept one bit binary patches to the distributions to make the > solution a reality? It's open source: > > unzip dmdzip.zip > chmod +x executables > zip -r dmdzip *
Okey, the binary patch is actually 349 bytes. A repackaged dmd is also 523737 bytes smaller (dmd 2.048, repackaged with 7z). That would save 5% in bandwidth cost and download time. Nobody cares.
