<div dir="ltr">Hi,<div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:07 PM, Magnus Therning <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:magnus@therning.org" target="_blank">magnus@therning.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 01:56:22PM +0100, Andreas Pakulat wrote:<br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> I know this has been raised in the past, but I don't think the<br>
> arguments for not providing the binaries are strong enough to<br>
> warrant the hassle a cmake user has to go through to run the 32bit<br>
> binaries on a 64bit Linux distribution.<br>
><br>
> I think requiring users to figure out how to install 32bit compat<br>
> libraries and keeping a copy of at least libc on the machine for no<br>
> other purpose than running cmake does not really fit the intention<br>
> of providing binaries in the first place. As far as I understand the<br>
> idea was to make it easier for people who cannot upgrade a<br>
> package-manager-provided CMake (for whatever reason) to use a newer<br>
> CMake. Requiring those people to build from source does not really<br>
> make it easy and not all distributions install 32bit compat<br>
> libraries out of the box (let alone older machines which have no<br>
> such compat libs at all)<br>
><br>
> So can we please get 64bit Linux binaries for the next CMake<br>
> release?<br>
<br>
</div></div>What 64-bit Linux distribution, that doesn't package CMake, do you<br>
use?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I did not say there is no CMake package, the point I'm trying to make is that if someone wants or needs a newer CMake release than his Distro provides this is not as easy as it should be for a 64Bit Linux system (that does not yet have 32bit compat libs installed).</div>
<div><br></div><div>Andreas</div></div></div></div>