[gariac]

Is there any modern distro that can't do multiarch? Even Debian can do it.

Posted via CB10

I run opensuse, so I didn't have an issue, but I believe some distributions don't have 32 bit libraries.

Example:
http://askubuntu.com/questions/29715...-64-bit-system

There are lots of rants on the interwebs about yast on Opensuse , but finding the 32 bit libraries is trivial. On debian based distributions, you sort of have to know the names of the libraries. I have limited experience with Debian except on Arm because fedora and opensuse on Arm aren't as stable as debian based distributions.

Yeah, I know about Aptitude, but I still find package management on debian kind of lame.

But the point is why release the IDE as 32 bit code. I'm having a hard time remembering when I has a 32 bit PC. I was an early adopter of AMD CPU when they went 64 bit. Checking the wiki, 2003 was the start of desktop 64 bit mainstream computers.

BB10 was released in 2013. I can't imagine any software developer on a 32 bit system in 2013.



Posted via CB10

[thurask]

But the point is why release the IDE as 32 bit code. I'm having a hard time remembering when I has a 32 bit PC. I was an early adopter of AMD CPU when they went 64 bit. Checking the wiki, 2003 was the start of desktop 64 bit mainstream computers.

BB10 was released in 2013. I can't imagine any software developer on a 32 bit system in 2013.

Posted via CB10

Eclipse itself still comes in two architectures, since (IIRC) some extensions and plugins explicitly depend on 32-bit Eclipse.

Posted via CB10

[gariac]

Eclipse itself still comes in two architectures, since (IIRC) some extensions and plugins explicitly depend on 32-bit Eclipse.

Posted via CB10

I haven't played with Momentics in a while, but they provide the entire stack ( if that is the right word these days.) That is, you don't use your own copy ( maybe native is the word) of Eclipse. Please forgive my terminology since I'm not a professional programmer, and this kind of inaccurate talk is raw meat for nitpickers. ;-)

The hello world sample code didn't even compile when I tried it. :-(


Posted via CB10

[vader42]

Well also according to Wikipedia, Linux has about 1.6% of the desktop market. I don't think that you have to look any further than that. Posted via CB10

With my best Monty python voice: ahem.....

As we all know - blackberry has about a 1.6% market share. Now linux also has a 1.6% share, so if it floats, it must be a witch - I mean everyone using Blackberry must also use linux.

Ah, I see you are a man of Science!

[ibrahim011]

Can't you use WINE emulator to run BlackBerry Link or no?

Posted via CB10

[m3mb3rsh1p]

If this hasn't been mentioned, Mac OS X is a fully POSIX - compliant UNIX OS. So is QNX upon which BlackBerry 10 is built.

I lov(ed) Linux for its seemingly low cost, fair principles and access to the UNIX/POSIX command library but after experiencing Mac OS and now BlackBerry 10, I now realise the folly which Linux and it's zealous antitheses has wrought upon UNIX and OS standards.

Until I tried OS X, my opinion of Macs was that they were a System for GUI-dependent users but have come to respect Apple immensely for achieving what Linux has fumbled with for over a decade, namely "Linux Desktop." Articles are still written today querying the completion of a task that should have been easily attainable with its unpaid(?!) global workforce and plethora of desktop libraries such as QT which BlackBerry appropriated for our BB10 devices.

What positive ideals GNU aspired to, have been unravelled by mindless opposition to basic economics as well as shovelling Open Source down the throats of users. Development should be separated from users.

The end result is that most commercial end-user products have remained targeted for Windows or Mac and hardware has remained largely closed / inaccessible all contrary to the original goals of GNU.

I now see the positives behind separating GNU / LINUX. One facilitates collaborative work the other takes the results and mashes them with loud self-importance and haphazard rebellion.

Further towards proving the caustic, progress-retardant nature of the various Linux mantras, BlackBerry and others have achieved success in attaching fabulous UI's to the UNIX core with full hardware compatibility and succeeded in attracting commercial products against the Big monoliths of Windows and Apple, all with a comparatively minuscule workforce. Linux still can't get the only two graphics card vendors to standardise their drivers.

It would be nice to have software work seamlessly on every OS but OS's themselves need to adhere to compatibility. I appreciate every positive thing that Linux has enabled and do use it on troubleshooting occasions but I haven't looked back since the pleasure of getting an OSXLatitude to work. I wish BlackBerry would just compile QNX wholly like every other UNIX and let us explore. Surely it must take some effort to disable the shell.

I also lament the fact that Linux pushed the more venerable, free, structured and open BSD systems to a quiet corner of the UNIX world and hogged all the glory.

Instead of creating desktop software, I actually wish BlackBerry would employ the potential of the UNIX within BB10 and turn Blend/Link into a device - hosted web service. This would make it compatible with all Web browsers.

Posted via CB10

[anon(8640833)]

I really want Blend to work on Linux.
And maybe a server version of link to put on my server.

[Richard Buckley]

If this hasn't been mentioned, Mac OS X is a fully POSIX - compliant UNIX OS. So is QNX upon which BlackBerry 10 is built.

I lov(ed) Linux for its seemingly low cost, fair principles and access to the UNIX/POSIX command library but after experiencing Mac OS and now BlackBerry 10, I now realise the folly which Linux and it's zealous antitheses has wrought upon UNIX and OS standards.

Until I tried OS X, my opinion of Macs was that they were a System for GUI-dependent users but have come to respect Apple immensely for achieving what Linux has fumbled with for over a decade, namely "Linux Desktop." Articles are still written today querying the completion of a task that should have been easily attainable with its unpaid(?!) global workforce and plethora of desktop libraries such as QT which BlackBerry appropriated for our BB10 devices.

What positive ideals GNU aspired to, have been unravelled by mindless opposition to basic economics as well as shovelling Open Source down the throats of users. Development should be separated from users.

The end result is that most commercial end-user products have remained targeted for Windows or Mac and hardware has remained largely closed / inaccessible all contrary to the original goals of GNU.

I now see the positives behind separating GNU / LINUX. One facilitates collaborative work the other takes the results and mashes them with loud self-importance and haphazard rebellion.

Further towards proving the caustic, progress-retardant nature of the various Linux mantras, BlackBerry and others have achieved success in attaching fabulous UI's to the UNIX core with full hardware compatibility and succeeded in attracting commercial products against the Big monoliths of Windows and Apple, all with a comparatively minuscule workforce. Linux still can't get the only two graphics card vendors to standardise their drivers.

It would be nice to have software work seamlessly on every OS but OS's themselves need to adhere to compatibility. I appreciate every positive thing that Linux has enabled and do use it on troubleshooting occasions but I haven't looked back since the pleasure of getting an OSXLatitude to work. I wish BlackBerry would just compile QNX wholly like every other UNIX and let us explore. Surely it must take some effort to disable the shell.

I also lament the fact that Linux pushed the more venerable, free, structured and open BSD systems to a quiet corner of the UNIX world and hogged all the glory.

Instead of creating desktop software, I actually wish BlackBerry would employ the potential of the UNIX within BB10 and turn Blend/Link into a device - hosted web service. This would make it compatible with all Web browsers.

Posted via CB10

I understand and agree with the spirit of your statements. But, computing is a pursuit based on precision. To be precise Mac OS X is not UNIX. UNIX is a specific implementation of an operating system. POSIX is an operating system interface specification. An OS can be POSIX complient without being UNIX, Unix or even Unix like. QNX is not UNIX, Unix or Unix like, but it is POSIX complaint. It is important to keep these minutia straight especially when discussion what one can do on each OS because it becomes important the closer a software system has to work with the OS.

One of the major differences between Unix and QNX is that Unix starts as a very large system that must be paired down to run on smaller hardware. QNX on the other hand is designed to run on small hardware. But can have larger systems added if the hardware support is available. While one can certainly run QNX on a desktop or a server, it is really a kit of parts that one can assemble a tailor made operating system from. And there are a lot of parts. If BlackBerry compiled the 'whole' of QNX it probably wouldn't install on a BB10 phone. It would also have a lot of parts that you couldn't use effectively on a BB10 phone.

But there is a shell available on BB10. The development environment provides access to it.

[m3mb3rsh1p]

Thanks for the clarification, Richard. I agree that my view of UNIX, POSIX, Unix, Unix-like is a little naive. I was under the impression that a full QNX Neutrino OS is Unix-like; and Mac OS too... considering its BSD foundation.

I suppose they look/feel Unix-like to me, but I'll heed your advice and respect these minutiae in future discussions.

Posted via CB10

[m3mb3rsh1p]

... computing is a pursuit based on precision.

Thanks for that inspiring admonishment.

Posted via CB10

[Richard Buckley]

Thanks for the clarification, Richard. I agree that my view of UNIX, POSIX, Unix, Unix-like is a little naive. I was under the impression that a full QNX Neutrino OS is Unix-like; and Mac OS too... considering its BSD foundation.

I suppose they look/feel Unix-like to me, but I'll heed your advice and respect these minutiae in future discussions.

Posted via CB10

You have to think of it as layers. From the UI layer the differences are small. Command line layer they become larger and more important. When writing programs, if the developer uses only POSIX then the same code will run on many platforms, but may not use important features. There are lots of timelines for UNIX and Unix systems and BSD was one of the earliest branches. But since UNIX was always a commercial product, any other offerings had to distinguish themselves. Sometimes simply compiling for a different OS is enough, but not normally so.

Here is one of the less complex timelines for Unix:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...x_families.svg

And one for Linux:
http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/wp-con...meline-7.2.png

Both are fairly complex.

[m3mb3rsh1p]

I suppose this answers a question I've had about QNX not being included in these timelines especially since it emerged in 1981, quite close to the BSD's.

[deadcowboy]

I would love some Linux software by BlackBerry.

Posted via CB10

[gariac]

Just a FYI here, this page crashes the crackberry app on my Z10. It probably has something to do with those large images.

For those that think OSX is the solution, it must be a funny question. They dropped java. Mono is there but tough on OSX. Really, OSX is only useful if you want to live in Apple's walled garden. So many linux programs are not found on OSX.

Apple dropping java made life a bit annoying for image processing, specifically imagej. They had to create a distribution of imagej with java for the OSX users (figi).

Sound on the OSX might have an edge over Linux.

Apple has funded some projects such as opengl, so I'm not an Apple basher, but I surely have no personal use for the OSX.

[vader42]

Crashes on a passport too.

[systemvolker]

They need to sandbox it.

Add: in different ways.

Hehehe

[Richard Buckley]

Just a FYI here, this page crashes the crackberry app on my Z10. It probably has something to do with those large images.

Noticed that. Only just got to a desktop so I could do something about it.

[gariac]

Noticed that. Only just got to a desktop so I could do something about it.

Now today it isn't crashing the Crackberry app.

Posted via CB10

[Richard Buckley]

Now today it isn't crashing the Crackberry app.

Posted via CB10

That's because I unembeded the pictures.

Posted via CB10

[vader42]

I am a firmware dev, and I run linux. I still use 32 bit linux as a lot of tools don't have 64bit versions (especially the older apps). Yes you can have both 32 and 64 bit libraries on your machine. I ran 64 bit for a while, but had to revert to a 32 bit system as some 32 bit utilities had hard coded links which messed up on 64 bit machines. I fixed a lot of them, but eventually gave up (wasted too much time).

The other possibility is that they only have to create one SDK You can get 32 bit running on 64 bit, but not the other way around.

[Alejandro Nova]

I fully and completely understand why BlackBerry isn't troubling with a Linux port for Blend, but I sense there's a tremendous opportunity being missed here. See:
- To a naive eye, the reason why BlackBerry does not ship Blend to Linux is the same reason why Apple doesn't ship iTunes. However, there's something nobody has mentioned: Apple dev tools are XCode and require Macs. Windows Phone uses XAML and requires Visual Studio with Windows. Android is somewhat platform agnostic, since it's Java. And BlackBerry? It uses Cascades/QML over Qt, so, if you want to develop BB apps, you better have knowledge of Qt and his concepts.
- Linux has 1.5% of market share, that's a fact. But beneath that fact, over 40% of that 1.5% has direct exposure to a desktop that uses Qt/QML for everything, KDE. If you can program a component for KDE, called Plasmoid, then you know the fundamentals of how to make a basic Cascades/BB10 app. Compare that metric with Windows and MacOS X. You may think it's not relevant, but we are talking about a potential 0.6% of the whole world, ready to become, if they wish, BlackBerry developers.

So, if you release Blend for Linux, it would be great. It would be even better, though, if you a) release the Blend APIs in your next SDK, and b) sponsor the creation of Blend-like features for KDE (and only KDE, to strengthen the Qt ecosystem), instead of releasing Blend. Think hard about that. KDE guys have done something amazing called KDE Connect that you should check, now, and something like that could be done with BlackBerries.

[Alejandro Nova]

Edit: KDE Connect WORKS on BlackBerry! Sorry about you, Unity, GNOME users, but whine on your developers. Install KDE Connect from the Amazon AppStore in your BlackBerry, and then ensure your Linux PCs have the port range 1714-1764 open for TCP and UDP. Those are firewall settings, because every Linux PC I can think of is well secured . After that, install KDE Connect in your distro:

$ sudo apt-get install kdeconnect (Ubuntu)
# yum install kde-connect (Fedora)

Now you are ready. Open the KDE Connect app in your BlackBerry, and press the Update button in your PC. You'll see the name "Q10" (or your BlackBerry model) and a request to pair it. Pair it and you'll be able to do the majority of things you can do with Blend.


Posted via CB10

[gariac]

I run opensuse. KDE is the default desktop and KDEconnect was already installed. It found my Z10 and I paired it. All this was pretty trivial.

However Dolphin can't open the z10. I'm using the wifi connection. It can't mount the file system. Obviously the Z10 shows up in places in Dolphin. The app and KDEconnect do say I am paired.

I'm on the 1016 leak if that makes a difference.

I see you get a notification icon in the desktop toolbar. My issue appears to be sshfs related.

OK, I don't have sshfs installed. Unfortunately I have internet connectivity issues at the moment but will try again when I have connectivity. (ISP sent a message saying the network would be down at stupid O clock for repairs and it is that time.)

Posted via CB10

[gariac]

OK, fiber is repaired. I loaded sshfs and the phone file system now appears. But there are no files found. This is over Wifi. I suppose I could plug the phone in via USB, but then I might as well just talk to the phone via samba.

I can issue a ping from the phone to the desktop, and the notification appears at the desktop. But not the other way around. I enable notifications on the phone, but the desktop can't ping the phone.


Posted via CB10

[BDLIVE4463]

I too really wish that Blend was available for Linux. Link too for that matter.

It would be nice if they at least ran through WINE. I bet the biggest hurdle is the usb drivers.

Posted via CB10