cant install vivaldi2 32bit due to libappindicator3-1:i386 on 64bit system
-
@sid0 there was a very important
./
located in my last post in regard to starting scripts directly or with wrappers (likesudo
) that use$PATH
to look up executable names.Assuming the problem with installing the
32bit
is not (just) missing multi-arch support, ifUbuntu
orDebian
are any indication, the64bit
and32bit
versions oflibappindicator3-1
are indeed not installable at the same time (conflicting files in/usr/share/doc/libappindicator3-1
).
Not to guarantee that there are other packages required, that are not (yet) multi-arch compatible!So if the script solution is not for you and you can not get rid of
libappindicator3-1:amd64
(I stopped trying when parts of Gnome would have to be removed) using the native64bit
package is, despite your reservations, not only the cleanest but the only remaining option. -
@lamarca how to add the repos, should i install vivaldi 1.14?
-
This command won't execute. It's for Non DEB/RPM, your distro is based on Debian, you need to the commands I told you:
1 - adding the repos
Go to /etc/apt/sources.list.d - Open the text editor (using sudo) to create a file called Vivaldi.list
For Stable### THIS FILE IS AUTOMATICALLY CONFIGURED ### # You may comment out this entry, but any other modifications may be lost. deb http://repo.vivaldi.com/stable/deb/ stable main
Do the same for the Snapshot
### THIS FILE IS AUTOMATICALLY CONFIGURED ### # You may comment out this entry, but any other modifications may be lost. deb http://repo.vivaldi.com/snapshot/deb/ stable main
2 run sudo sudo apt-get update
3 run sudo apt-get -s upgrade | awk '/Inst.+/ { print $2}' -
@lamarca repo added, now update output is:
sudo apt-get update
[sudo] password for mint:
Hit:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu xenial InRelease
Get:2 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu xenial-security InRelease [107 kB]
Hit:3 http://ppa.launchpad.net/maarten-baert/simplescreenrecorder/ubuntu xenial InRelease
Get:4 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu xenial-updates InRelease [109 kB]
Hit:5 http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu xenial InRelease
Ign:6 http://repo.vivaldi.com/stable/deb stable InRelease
Get:7 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu xenial-backports InRelease [107 kB]
Get:8 http://repo.vivaldi.com/stable/deb stable Release [3,829 B]
Get:9 http://repo.vivaldi.com/stable/deb stable Release.gpg [819 B]
Get:10 http://repo.vivaldi.com/stable/deb stable/main amd64 Packages [1,557 B]
Ign:11 http://packages.linuxmint.com sylvia InRelease
Get:12 http://repo.vivaldi.com/stable/deb stable/main i386 Packages [1,558 B]
Hit:13 http://packages.linuxmint.com sylvia Release
Fetched 331 kB in 5s (62.5 kB/s)
Reading package lists... Doneno output after sudo apt-get -s upgrade | awk '/Inst.+/ { print $2}'
-
@lamarca it will work, if called correctly and is the suggested way to get multiple parallel installations of Vivaldi onto
DEB
/RPM
based systems (needed for a/b testing).Trying to work this out via regular package management will either
- install the
64bit
version (what would have worked from the beginning) - or lead to problems when
libappindicator3-1:i386
needs to be resolved as a dependency (see topic).
- install the
-
Well done. The last command is trick, please remove " | awk '/Inst.+/ { print $2}', reexecute and see you find anything
-
@lamarca sudo apt-get -s upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
The following packages have been kept back:
vivaldi-stable:i386
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. -
@sid0 Bingo! Now you can install it
sudo apt-get install vivaldi-stable
-
@lamarca sudo apt-get install vivaldi-stable
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required:
libappindicator1:i386 libdbus-glib-1-2:i386 libdbusmenu-glib4:i386
libdbusmenu-gtk4:i386 libgconf-2-4:i386 libindicator7:i386
Use 'sudo apt autoremove' to remove them.
Recommended packages:
libu2f-udev adobe-flashplugin chromium-codecs-ffmpeg-extra
The following packages will be REMOVED:
vivaldi-stable:i386
The following NEW packages will be installed:
vivaldi-stable
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 1 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 57.6 MB of archives.
After this operation, 19.8 MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] Y
Get:1 http://repo.vivaldi.com/stable/deb stable/main amd64 vivaldi-stable amd64 2.0.1309.29-2 [57.6 MB]installation on the way, are you sure its 32bit?
-
@sid0 that is, as prophesized, the
64bit
version.
I'd suggest to stick with it anyway, less trouble for you to keep it up to date in the long run. -
@sid0 If the architecture of the your OS is 64bits
-
@lamarca ok, thank you a lot for your support
-
Reminder: uninstalling Vivaldi will not delete the folders
/opt/vivaldi
~/.config/vivaldi/DefaultDelete them manually.
-
@gwen-dragon
i386
support seems to be available, since the32bit
packages needed for older Vivaldi were installed.The required package
libappindicator3-1
seems to not be in the Mint repo and I assume it is taken from the Ubuntu repo.
That version can not be installed for both architectures simultaniously due to not splitting the documentation into an extra (architecure independent) package. -
@sid0 Read the whole command that was suggested. It specified the architecture via the -a switch. Also, you don't really need to sudo it since you could just install single user, like so:
sh vivaldi-install.sh -f -a i386
-
@sid0 Why are you installing 32Bit Vivaldi on 64Bit? This is a bad plan and not really supported. Yes it can potentially run but there are no good reasons to do this
-
to save ram as my memory is only 2gb.
@sid0 Using 32bit will not save your RAM usage, it will just mean worse performance
-
it installs to a hidden user subdirectory.
@becm Why would this matter? You can still launch Vivaldi from the menus in your desktop environment
-
Your Distro doesn't need that script.
@lamarca What he/she does because they are trying to do something weird. Yes the script was written to help people who do not have another installation option that works. This qualifies. So in a sense, that is exactly what the script is for.
-
@ruario totally agree with your design choice for the user install location.
Just pointing out the differences to system wide install to/usr/local/share
(would have required root privileges).