My Linux Adventure

Jolene Benoir

Hello World
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
612
Location
Minnesnowta
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
Dec 2010
More on the Ubuntu 32 bit story. It appears that they are walking it back a bit now, stating that they will support 32bit libraries on future releases, BUT, they will be locked at the 18.04 libraries, no updates to them. They said this on some discord forum, not exactly getting the word out. According to a youtuber below, who I watch frequently, the LinuxMint team and the POP OS team will be maintaining their own 32bit libraries, regardless of what Canonical does, as he discusses the issue.

I tend to agree with him that Ubuntu proper is going to see people deciding to use other distros, whether it be those derivatives that choose to maintain 32bit libraries or other distros altogether like Arch, OpenSuSe, Fedora and so on.

 

Ashiri

√(-1)
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
373
Location
RL: NZ
SL Rez
2007
SLU Posts
-1
FWIW, I ditched Ubuntu (and avoided Debian for the same reason) when their method of determining whether to use 32 or 64 bit library broke sufficiently to prevent SL from running.
 
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Jolene Benoir

Noodles

Queen of Ramen
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
382
Location
Illinois
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
04-28-2010
SLU Posts
6947
I did that once, either with Windows 8 or Windows 10 and had the same thing happen. Katheryne's link should get you through. There was also a time when Windows 10 updates were killing grub as well, but I believe that has been completely fixed.
YEah, I had it kill Grub twice on my desktop, and both times it also blew out the partition. That's when I stopped dual booting.
 
  • 1Hug
Reactions: Jolene Benoir

Noodles

Queen of Ramen
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
382
Location
Illinois
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
04-28-2010
SLU Posts
6947
More on the Ubuntu 32 bit story. It appears that they are walking it back a bit now, stating that they will support 32bit libraries on future releases, BUT, they will be locked at the 18.04 libraries, no updates to them. They said this on some discord forum, not exactly getting the word out. According to a youtuber below, who I watch frequently, the LinuxMint team and the POP OS team will be maintaining their own 32bit libraries, regardless of what Canonical does, as he discusses the issue.
I don't know enough about hoe ingrained the libraries are, but could they be optional? Like, if you needed them could they let you sudo apt-get 32bitlibraries or whatever?
 
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Jolene Benoir

Noodles

Queen of Ramen
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
382
Location
Illinois
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
04-28-2010
SLU Posts
6947
Alright, I got Ubuntu to boot, I had to putz with some Bios Settings and manually locate GRUB in the BIOS. I've never had to do that before, so I guess I am not surprised I missed it.

Windows 10 doesn't show up in GRUB, but I think I can fix that by just looking up how to add Windows 10 to GRUB.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: Jolene Benoir

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen🐱
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,148
Location
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
Here's more on Canonical walking back its decision to end 32-bit support in Ubuntu:

On a side note, it actually surprises me that there is enough of a Linux gaming community to actually sway a corporation like Canonical. I'm impressed!
 

Jolene Benoir

Hello World
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
612
Location
Minnesnowta
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
Dec 2010
I don't know enough about hoe ingrained the libraries are, but could they be optional? Like, if you needed them could they let you sudo apt-get 32bitlibraries or whatever?
I, too, am not sure how that would work. Different apps/games use different libraries. Someone posted on an Ubuntu forum their lack of success in attempting to get something like 50 different GOG games to work, without the i386 libraries. I am not knowledgeable enough to know whether they could be downloaded as one package or if they are installed piecemeal with each app. From what it appears, Canonical was suggesting Snap paks.

Here's more on Canonical walking back its decision to end 32-bit support in Ubuntu:

On a side note, it actually surprises me that there is enough of a Linux gaming community to actually sway a corporation like Canonical. I'm impressed!
The answer to that lies in the paragraph below, I think. Having Valve make such a public statement that they would switch focus to a different distro would have been a blow, both in terms of Ubuntu users/potential users as well as a publicity problem.

In particular, a Valve, creator of the popular Steam gaming platform, developer, announced, on Twitter: "Ubuntu 19.10 and future releases will not be officially supported by Steam or recommended to our users. We will evaluate ways to minimize breakage for existing users, but will also switch our focus to a different distribution, currently TBD."
 
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Katheryne Helendale

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen🐱
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,148
Location
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
I, too, am not sure how that would work. Different apps/games use different libraries. Someone posted on an Ubuntu forum their lack of success in attempting to get something like 50 different GOG games to work, without the i386 libraries. I am not knowledgeable enough to know whether they could be downloaded as one package or if they are installed piecemeal with each app. From what it appears, Canonical was suggesting Snap paks.
I'm not entirely sure how it works either. My understanding is that, within a 64-bit environment, the 32-bit libraries need am emulation layer of sorts, a framework within which they can operate. In Debian and its derivatives, that framework is the ia32-libs framework (Ubuntu rolls this in a package called Multiarch since Ubuntu 11.10). It includes many common 32-bit libraries, but for the most part, the individual 32-bit applications supply their own libraries. But they require the ia32-libs framework. I think it was this that Canonical was talking about discontinuing.
 

Bartholomew Gallacher

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
1,040
32bit support is today an option, which you can turn on or off in the kernel. BTW if you never compiled a Linux kernel yourself, I can tell you that this is an interesting experience. There's tons of stuff in it you surely never heard about.

After 32bit support is enabled in the kernel, you do need a 32bit user land: this means libraries and the binaries running on it. Maintaining this extra supply of libraries takes some additional effort, so causes costs.

Canonical wanted to turn off the 32bit support in the kernel by default, meaning you would have only been able to run 64bit programs because the kernel would refuse to launch anything 32bit related at all.
 

Chalice Yao

The Purple
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
139
Location
Somewhere Purple, Germany
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
Dec 2007
SLU Posts
9108
After 32bit support is enabled in the kernel, you do need a 32bit user land: this means libraries and the binaries running on it. Maintaining this extra supply of libraries takes some additional effort, so causes costs.

Canonical wanted to turn off the 32bit support in the kernel by default, meaning you would have only been able to run 64bit programs because the kernel would refuse to launch anything 32bit related at all.
Nah, the other way around, from what I understood; They simply wanted to drop any 32bit libraries (i.e. what causes them actual work) but keep the 32bit executable option in the kernel enabled.

So third parties would have had to maintain and distribute their own 32bit libraries for their software - and of course, each third party would have had to supply their own copy of the same library.

Ubuntu's handwaving was 'Use something like Snappy'.
 

Noodles

Queen of Ramen
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
382
Location
Illinois
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
04-28-2010
SLU Posts
6947
So, a bit more detail on where my dual boot got hung up, in case anyone else had a similar issue.

This is an Acer laptop. In the bios there is a tab for security and a tab for boot. In the Security tab, with secure boot enabled, there are options you can choose, one being to "Add a trusted bootloader" or something to that effect. I had to pick this, then browse to hdd0, Ubuntu, grub and pick grub64.whatever.

Give it a name and say Yes to trust it.

Save and reboot then go back into the bios. The option you just added will now show up in the boot tab, though it will probably be at the bottom, so it will need to be bumped up in the boot order.

One real key thing here. The option to add a trusted bootloader ONLY appears of secure boot is enabled. However, once added, it remains in the boot list even if SecureBoot is disabled. So SecureBoot had to be enabled to add it, then it can be disabled later if needed.

Also if you pick the wrong one and the machine craps out (like I did) just go back to the bios and reset secure boot to default settings, then reboot back to the bios for the reset to take effect, and pick a different grub file.
 

Argent Stonecutter

Emergency Mustelid Hologram
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
777
Location
Coonspiracy Central, Noonkkot
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
Sep 2009
SLU Posts
20780
Don't forget commercial inertia for the slow uptake. Even just looking at Intel, several times they created a better architecture which never took off due to customer disinterest in using a new architecture (and having to update all their software, assuming the vendors were still around, of course)
Let's see, high end Intel architectures post 8086:

1. The 80286, 80386, 80486, 80586, etc... slightly less register starved than the 8086 but gawd.

2. The iApx432... a CISC architecture that made the VAX look RISCy and was only exceeded in complexity by one of the Japanese TRON projects.

3. The i860... originally envisioned as a parallel coprocessor, it was too complex for the compilers of the time to generate good code. There were a few i860 based workstations but it never really got anywhere.

4. The i960... in cooperation with Seimens, a good solid RISC design that they promptly killed by dropping the MMU. It continued as a pretty good embedded processor for a while. A lot of people, myself included, were convinced they nerfed the i960 to keep it from competing with the *86 but it may have simply been due to them getting in a fight with Seimens who owned the MMU design.

5. The Itanium... a bizarre pseudo-VLIW architecture with multiple parallel instructions bundled together in chunks, that required code recompilation every new generation because the size of the chunks changed depending on internal architectural details. Also, it really needed a test run to generate traces and a second recompilation based on the traces to really get full performance.

6. They licensed ARM and had a decent ARM product line called XScale (based on DEC's StrongARM implementation), but they sold it off.

7. Their copy of AMD's 64-bit architecture.

Seriously, the only decent intel architectures ever are the ones they partnered with someone other than HP on, or that they copied or licensed.

FWIW, I ditched Ubuntu (and avoided Debian for the same reason) when their method of determining whether to use 32 or 64 bit library broke sufficiently to prevent SL from running.
I ran into that in 12.04 I think. Sometimes around there.
 
Last edited:

Han Held

Active member
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
355
Location
Anchorage
Joined SLU
September, 2010
SLU Posts
7705
I ditched linux when I realized that I'm getting Windows licenses included with my PCs and I don't have muck with 'activating' it, and also that dealing with Linux graphic drivers (for AMD and Nvidia) seems to be an unending dumpster fire.

I try it from time to time, usually when I switch video cards ("is this still a dumpster fire? Yep, it is") ...credit where credit is due, though? The free drivers (nouveau; whatver AMD's open source thing is) work well enough that if I had to I could simply use those (and run around on the lowest settings, settling for like 10fps) to use SL.

From like 12.04 to 16.04 roughly ...getting slvoice was a pain in the ass and usually didn't work. I have the impression that got better around 16.04 but I'm honestly not sure (bc driver issues usually made me uninstall).
 

Argent Stonecutter

Emergency Mustelid Hologram
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
777
Location
Coonspiracy Central, Noonkkot
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
Sep 2009
SLU Posts
20780
I never had a problem with the nVidia drivers on Ubuntu, it was always the 32-bit libraries that tripped me up and 64 bit Firestorm is totally solid so I don't need to care any more.

I don't know why you'd want to use the free video drivers though. They're kind of only there because some people are Debian purists.
 

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen🐱
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,148
Location
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
I don't know why you'd want to use the free video drivers though. They're kind of only there because some people are Debian purists.
And for those of us using older GPUs that are no longer formally supported by the manufacturer.
 
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
103
Location
Darmstadt, Germany
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2008
I've *never* used SLVoice. Back then in '08 through '09, I used the excuse that voice simply doesn't work on Linux (which was true back then), and dunno, it has become a habit since then. Even now, that I *could* make SLVoice just work via WINE or Mono, I still don't use Voice at all.
 

Bartholomew Gallacher

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
1,040
From like 12.04 to 16.04 roughly ...getting slvoice was a pain in the ass and usually didn't work. I have the impression that got better around 16.04 but I'm honestly not sure (bc driver issues usually made me uninstall).
Actually Linden Labs officially dropped support for Voice on Linux as well later Linux itself years ago. Firestorm still has it, but you need to run the Windows version of slvoice.exe using Wine.
 

Argent Stonecutter

Emergency Mustelid Hologram
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
777
Location
Coonspiracy Central, Noonkkot
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
Sep 2009
SLU Posts
20780
I've *never* used SLVoice. Back then in '08 through '09, I used the excuse that voice simply doesn't work on Linux (which was true back then), and dunno, it has become a habit since then. Even now, that I *could* make SLVoice just work via WINE or Mono, I still don't use Voice at all.
Yes, yes, yes! That was the best part of voice not working on Linux!
 

Noodles

Queen of Ramen
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
382
Location
Illinois
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
04-28-2010
SLU Posts
6947
I ditched linux when I realized that I'm getting Windows licenses included with my PCs and I don't have muck with 'activating' it, and also that dealing with Linux graphic drivers (for AMD and Nvidia) seems to be an unending dumpster fire.
I've never had an issue with graphics drivers but getting things working on my Laptop reminded me of the issues I always had on my old laptop. Wireless drivers. On the old laptop there was this whole hassle I needed to do to get things working, but it was a Netbook, so I forgave it.

The current one "works" but it only connects at 1MBPS download speed. Upload Speed is fine on SpeedOf.Me. In windows it's fine. It connects fine. I noticed a problem when I went to download firestorm. It was INCREDIBLY slow.
 

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen🐱
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,148
Location
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
I've never had an issue with graphics drivers but getting things working on my Laptop reminded me of the issues I always had on my old laptop. Wireless drivers. On the old laptop there was this whole hassle I needed to do to get things working, but it was a Netbook, so I forgave it.

The current one "works" but it only connects at 1MBPS download speed. Upload Speed is fine on SpeedOf.Me. In windows it's fine. It connects fine. I noticed a problem when I went to download firestorm. It was INCREDIBLY slow.
I've never had issues with graphics drivers either, except for back around 2008 when an nVidia driver update in Ubuntu caused me to keep losing wifi connection when in SL with a 1.20.x viewer. It took me a while to sort that one out.

But I definitely remember always having issues with Broadcom-based wifi cards, particularly how much of a pain in the ass it was to get one working, since the card's firmware did not reside on the card, and was not provided with Linux Broadcom drivers. That was a complete dumpster fire.