Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

I wonder if WSL will support the i386 (32 bit) program running later? #2468

Open
erikaemma opened this issue Sep 2, 2017 · 66 comments

Comments

@erikaemma
Copy link

commented Sep 2, 2017

I just want to run arm-linux-gcc 4.4.3 :}

sudo dpkg --add-architecture i386
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get dist-upgrade

sudo apt-get install g++-multilib
sudo apt-get install libncurses5:i386
sudo apt-get install libc6:i386 libgcc1:i386 gcc-4.8-base:i386 libstdc++5:i386 libstdc++6:i386
sudo apt-get install lib32z1 lib32ncurses5 lib32ncursesw5 lib32ncursesw5-dev 
@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Sep 3, 2017

The User Voice was opened back up. If the embedded people were as organised as university students taking Machine Learning courses it would have a better chance.

@poizan42

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Sep 4, 2017

@plgkm6 That is quite an old gcc, do you need it for binary compatibility? Can't you just use 4.4.7? It is my understanding that gcc never breaks binary compatibility in minor releases. I believe you can just install the amd64 versions of the cross compiler from an older ubuntu version - you can find the softfloat version here and hardfloat version here. Select the amd64 built, you'll need the gcc-..._base_..., cpp-... and gcc-... packages at least.

For c++ support you will also need the g++-... and libstdc++6-4.4-dev-... packages.

If you really need gcc 4.4.3 then you could build a version for a 64-bit host yourself, there are plenty of guides on how to build gcc cross compilers.

@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Sep 4, 2017

I was going to mention using the amd64 cross; but didn't because it isn't the root of (some of) the embedded guys' difficulty. The problem is many of their platform's supported build toolchains are stuck on 32-bit. Most notably Android, but also other embedded scenarios. Ref #1687, #1771, et al

@MikeGitb

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Sep 6, 2017

Disclaimer: I'm a x64 zealot and I'm programming embedded systems down to 8bit microcontroller, but have almost no experience with Android development.

My hope would be that without 32 support, the tool vendors get more pressure to update their toolchains and I'd much rather see some progress on their side than resources being wasted on backwards compatibility on the WSL side.

@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Sep 6, 2017

I'm a x64 zealot

Yeah, me too a little. That said, you'd think Microsoft would be more sympathetic. My Visual Studio 2017 (August preview) is 32-bit, almost 15 years after Opteron was released. If the implication here is that Microsoft should encourage tool vendors like say Google to update, an obvious retort would be: "Whatever dude. You first."

Funny story if you are a 64-bit zealot.... The new ARM-powered Windows 10 laptops that are supposedly coming this Christmas have a 32-bit x86 emulator only. The laptops won't run amd64 apps. On a 64-bit Snapdragon. [I understand the reason; I just think it is funny.]

No word yet on whether they'll support WSL. 😉

@fpqc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Sep 6, 2017

@therealkenc I sorta wonder if they could actually leverage what they already have with WSL to ARM64. If I remember correctly, ADSS was originally designed to emulate Android on Windows phone (running on an ARM). Ubuntu has an ARM port, and that kind of userspace would be a natural thing to use in a WSL for ARM64. I guess I'm saying that it's interesting since part of the work seems like it's already done!

@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Sep 6, 2017

@fpqc - [Squarely in discussion tag territory] Yeah I yanked Ben's chain on that in #1769 (message). It would be fun to see for the amusement value, but my (sometimes flawed) powers of deductive reasoning say "nah". Ubuntu userland isn't the problem. The kernel is technically feasible. The problem is the target platform is the cheapest of cheap laptops. Not exactly a 'development use case scenario'. There's only 7-8 people on the team, and they need another target platform to support like they need a bullet in the head. Maybe I am jaded by the fact that I have seen this show before, and the ending is always the same. No not Windows 10 RT. I am old enough to have seen Windows NT 3.1 on MIPS. "This too will pass". Or, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe someone upstairs will tell the team different. Carry the OneCore torch and all that. Or maybe they'll do it for the amusement value. Or... maybe developers will run out in droves to buy Snapdraggon powered laptops this Christmas.

@poizan42

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Sep 6, 2017

32-bit support could be fixed for probably 99% of programs by making a custom glibc, which anyone who feels up for it could do:

You can in fact run 32-bit code in WSL land. If you do a far jump to segment 0x23 then you are executing code in compatibility mode (i.e. 32-bit mode) - do a far jump to 0x33 to get back in 64-bit land. The problem is that WSL only supports 64-bit syscalls, so 32-bit code attempting to make syscalls won't work (and you can't trap them either, see #1655). I have a small demonstration that this is possible here: https://gist.github.com/poizan42/8ff01d3df80b1663afef775ca812b699

So if someone feel up for it then it should be possible to port glibc to "lol64" (Linux on Linux 64) that jumps to 64-bit mode to perform all the syscalls, and it should work for everything except fully static binaries and the rare stuff that makes syscalls without going through glibc (some emulation software possibly)

@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Sep 7, 2017

rare stuff that makes syscalls without going through glibc (some emulation software possibly)

Rare stuff, like gdb. Very cool hack though. #1655 was a good bug report by the way. I hope it gets addressed on the merits, nevermind the use case. Maybe ping a name-drop over there at some point. Good issue posts get lost/forgotten sometimes in all the noise.

@MikeGitb

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Sep 7, 2017

[I understand the reason;

Actually I don't - That is, I can speculate, but if you have any actual information on this I would be thankful if you could share

@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Sep 7, 2017

Well since you qualified the question, nope. I do not work at Microsoft, and even if I did, I couldn't share actual information like that. But I understand the reason.

@MikeGitb

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Sep 8, 2017

@therealkenc: Just to be clear, with "actual" information I didn't mean "official" information, but more like "knowledge / reasonable assumptions I gathered from other posts or experience".

As I said, I myself can only speculate that it has to do with performance or reuse of code, but that is not even an educated guess, because I have no knowledge about where the pain points are when trying to run x86 or x64 code on an arm system or how Microsoft does it.

@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Sep 8, 2017

There is never a single reason a company makes a decision. But my guess, for the price you've paid for it, is that it has at least partially to do with not running amok of instruction set patents with their emulator. 32-bit x86 is a smaller surface for Intel’s lawyers to attack, because most if not all of the juicy 32-bit x86 patents have expired. This makes the MSFT lawyer's jobs easier, and since these are low end battery optimised 4GB notebooks anyway, there is not a strong reason to make their lawyer’s jobs harder. It doesn't matter whether Intel has a legal leg to stand on, or not, of course. It would cost more for the in-house legal analysis, let alone risk a fight, than the entire engineering effort of the port.

My basis for this hypothesis is that Microsoft, Qualcomm, Lenovo, and the rest don't want to have to advertise the 32-bit limitation any more than you want to hear it. Whatever the technical challenges of doing an amd64 emulator, which I suspect are marginal in the scheme, they are not high enough to justify having to explain to customers and all the Arstechnicas and Engadgets of the world that the machines don't run x64/amd64 binaries. Thus, I think the reasons are at least in part non-technical.

I could be wrong, IANAL, and all that.....

@Froosh

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 21, 2018

Based on some tinkering I was doing with qemu for some ARM dev, I think I may have found a technique to allow general 32-bit support in WSL. Hat-tip to @therealkenc for the concept 😁

Edit: requires "Fall Creators Update", 1709, build 16299 or newer (I think)

Presuming a fresh Ubuntu WSL instance, you'll need to install the qemu-user-static package, add the i386 binfmt, enable the i386 architecture, update your package lists, and install some i386 packages:

Install qemu and binfmt

sudo apt update
sudo apt install qemu-user-static
sudo update-binfmts --install i386 /usr/bin/qemu-i386-static --magic '\x7fELF\x01\x01\x01\x03\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x03\x00\x03\x00\x01\x00\x00\x00' --mask '\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xfc\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xf8\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff'

[Edit: whoops, need to update package lists, added sudo apt update]

This will activate i386 support by causing them to be executed through qemu-i386-static, and drop a config file into /var/lib/binfmts/ for future reactivation.

You will need to reactivate this every time you restart WSL and want i386 support:

sudo service binfmt-support start

Enable i386 architecture and packages

sudo dpkg --add-architecture i386
sudo apt update
sudo apt install gcc:i386

Try it out

$ file /usr/bin/gcc-5
/usr/bin/gcc-5: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=2637bb7cb85f8f12b40f03cd015d404930c3c790, stripped

$ /usr/bin/gcc-5 --version
gcc-5 (Ubuntu 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.9) 5.4.0 20160609
Copyright (C) 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

$ gcc helloworld.c -o helloworld

$ ./helloworld
Hello, world!

$ file helloworld
helloworld: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=3a0c7be5c6a8d45613e4ef2b7b3474df6224a5da, not stripped

Proof

And to prove it really was working, disable i386 support and try again:

$ sudo service binfmt-support stop
 * Disabling additional executable binary formats binfmt-support [ OK ]

$ ./helloworld
-bash: ./helloworld: cannot execute binary file: Exec format error
@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Mar 21, 2018

What does the binfmt_misc flags look like? I noticed your service binfmt-support start worked unimpeded in this instance. Still trying to figure out what is going on there. [edit] nvm I missed that you added it manually per #2620 in the quick skim. Not sure what the implications for multilib are going to be, but this is definitely cool. Still a little surprised no one did this sooner. I had left #2620 in a "whatever people, need-repro" since October. It was only after you posted that I even looked.

@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Mar 21, 2018

I had to chase some generic apt borkage. After the dpkg --add-architecture and apt update, the apt install gcc:i386 gave me:

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 gcc:i386 : Depends: cpp:i386 (>= 4:5.3.1-1ubuntu1) but it is not going to be installed
            Depends: gcc-5:i386 (>= 5.3.1-3~) but it is not going to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.

Installing cpp-5:i386 and binutils:i386 harder eventually got me there. Pretty "normal" disarray for apt though. Could be just me.

Performance seems great so far in cursory tests. Which, of course it is; why wouldn't it be. The i386 code is being JIT compiled into x86-64. [One could even imagine hypothetical scenarios where it was faster on long long heavy code with lots of register pressure, though that's probably mostly wishful thinking.]

Nicely played Froosh. Adding the coveted workaround-available tag.

@fcying

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 23, 2018

@Froosh sudo apt install gcc:i386 have some problem:

 gcc:i386 : Depends: cpp:i386 (>= 4:5.3.1-1ubuntu1) but it is not going to be installed
            Depends: gcc-5:i386 (>= 5.3.1-3~) but it is not going to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.

I use sudo apt install -y libc6:i386 libncurses5:i386 libstdc++6:i386 zlib1g:i386 zlib1g-dev:i386 instead of it.
Now it can run 32bit program , thanks very mush~~~~

@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Mar 23, 2018

E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.

If anyone feels competent enough at dpkg and apt to make a definitive statement (that's not me) about how to add an i386 target to a pure amd64 Debian derived system after the fact it would be worth having on the books. Seems to me dpkg --add-architecture i386 ought to be enough, but that doesn't seem to be the case in practice. I only had to add cpp-5:i386 and binutils:i386, which managed to drag in the rest of the dependencies automatically (the most notable of which is of course libc6:i386). The "held broken packages" error is incorrect and/or spurious; there aren't any held packages, broken or otherwise. Maybe someone motivated could ask what's going on there in the Ubuntu forums. I suspect there is some baseline that is expected to exist for a MultiArch install, but really I just don't know.

@XudongX

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Apr 19, 2018

Thank you very much, Froosh. I had run a 32bit binary file in Ubuntu WSL. But, if I want to use gdb to debug the binary file, some error info displayed:

dong@Yoga-900:/mnt/d/bomblab$ gdb ./bomb
qemu: Unsupported syscall: 355
GNU gdb (Ubuntu 7.11.1-0ubuntu1~16.5) 7.11.1
...

And, if I want to continue:

...
(gdb) start
Temporary breakpoint 1 at 0x804894b: file bomb.c, line 37.
Starting program: /mnt/d/bomblab/bomb
qemu: Unsupported syscall: 26
Welcome to my fiendish little bomb. You have 6 phases with
which to blow yourself up. Have a nice day!

I am a new Linux user, and this is my first time using gdb, I hope I didn't ask a wrong question

@lygstate

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 22, 2018

Thanks a lot, works for me.

@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented May 22, 2018

qemu: Unsupported syscall: 355

this

qemu: Unsupported syscall: 26

and this

@Xinmudotmoe

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Nov 5, 2018

@Biswa96 No, here is just an alternative. The correct solution for 64-bit Kernel running 32-bit programs is not binfmt_misc. Binfmt_misc may be more convenient to run programs that Kernel does not support. In fact, on 64-bit Linux you rarely need to install a 32-bit compatible program. At the same time, the performance of QEMU in WSL is very worrying.

@upsampled

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Dec 19, 2018

Not getting the same results for GCC-7

$ sudo apt update
$ sudo apt install qemu-user-static
$ sudo update-binfmts --install i386 /usr/bin/qemu-i386-static --magic '\x7fELF\x01\x01\x01\x03\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x03\x00\x03\x00\x01\x00\x00\x00' --mask '\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xfc\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xf8\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff'
$ sudo service binfmt-support start
$ sudo dpkg --add-architecture i386
$ sudo apt update
$ sudo apt install cpp-5:i386 binutils:i386
$ sudo apt install gcc:i386

...
$ file /usr/bin/gcc-7
/usr/bin/gcc-7: symbolic link to i686-linux-gnu-gcc-7

$ readlink -f  /usr/bin/gcc-7
/usr/bin/i686-linux-gnu-gcc-7

$ file /usr/bin//i686-linux-gnu-gcc-7
/usr/bin//i686-linux-gnu-gcc-7: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 3.2.0, BuildID[sha1]=8d0e813ee35f322165b86b37d523b9f9b432e37e, stripped

$ /usr/bin/gcc-7 --version
gcc-7 (Ubuntu 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04) 7.3.0
Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

$ gcc ./hello.c -o ./hello
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-linux-gnu/7/../../../../i686-linux-gnu/bin/ld: /usr/lib/gcc/i686-linux-gnu/7/liblto_plugin.so: error loading plugin: /usr/lib/gcc/i686-linux-gnu/7/liblto_plugin.so: wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS32
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
@Dittozzz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 1, 2019

But when I use gdb to debug a program, I can't make a breakpoint in address . Beacuse the gdb is configured as "x86_64-linux-gnu" . How can I debug without changing the version of gdb ?
image

@Xinmudotmoe

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 1, 2019

@Dittozzz Try using gdb-multiarch ?

@Dittozzz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 1, 2019

@Dittozzz Try using gdb-multiarch ?

emmmm , still like that ....

@Dittozzz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 1, 2019

@Dittozzz Try using gdb-multiarch ?

The arch is not compatible. Can't access memory at address 0x80484af .

@lygstate

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 1, 2019

by using docker may be option, even though the wsl native docker are not stable yet, but promising

@johnwcowan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 12, 2019

It's all very well to say "vendors should update their toolchains", but some "vendors" are one-man operations who don't have the resources to add a 64-bit back end to their compilers. I'm thinking in particular of the Larceny implementation of Scheme, which is itself 32-bit-only but more to the point generates executables that are 32-bit-only. I can run these fine on actual Linux or Windows, but on WSL they don't work, which is very very annoying. (I hear they won't work on the next MacOS either.)

My current workaround is to install Larceny under Cygwin, put /mnt/c/cygwin/bin at the end of my $PATH, and make sure any code I compile is stored there too, since WSL will now run Windows executables. It's still annoying to have to type "larceny.exe" or "myprog.exe", and it's very annoying that neither one can see the WSL file system, but it's (slightly) better than nothing.

@johnwcowan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 21, 2019

@liudonghua123

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Apr 3, 2019

Based on some tinkering I was doing with qemu for some ARM dev, I think I may have found a technique to allow general 32-bit support in WSL. Hat-tip to @therealkenc for the concept 😁

Edit: requires "Fall Creators Update", 1709, build 16299 or newer (I think)

Presuming a fresh Ubuntu WSL instance, you'll need to install the qemu-user-static package, add the i386 binfmt, enable the i386 architecture, update your package lists, and install some i386 packages:

Install qemu and binfmt

sudo apt update
sudo apt install qemu-user-static
sudo update-binfmts --install i386 /usr/bin/qemu-i386-static --magic '\x7fELF\x01\x01\x01\x03\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x03\x00\x03\x00\x01\x00\x00\x00' --mask '\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xfc\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xf8\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff'

[Edit: whoops, need to update package lists, added sudo apt update]

This will activate i386 support by causing them to be executed through qemu-i386-static, and drop a config file into /var/lib/binfmts/ for future reactivation.

You will need to reactivate this every time you restart WSL and want i386 support:

sudo service binfmt-support start

Enable i386 architecture and packages

sudo dpkg --add-architecture i386
sudo apt update
sudo apt install gcc:i386

Try it out

$ file /usr/bin/gcc-5
/usr/bin/gcc-5: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=2637bb7cb85f8f12b40f03cd015d404930c3c790, stripped

$ /usr/bin/gcc-5 --version
gcc-5 (Ubuntu 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.9) 5.4.0 20160609
Copyright (C) 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

$ gcc helloworld.c -o helloworld

$ ./helloworld
Hello, world!

$ file helloworld
helloworld: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=3a0c7be5c6a8d45613e4ef2b7b3474df6224a5da, not stripped

Proof

And to prove it really was working, disable i386 support and try again:

$ sudo service binfmt-support stop
 * Disabling additional executable binary formats binfmt-support [ OK ]

$ ./helloworld
-bash: ./helloworld: cannot execute binary file: Exec format error

This works for me unless I uninstalled previous installed 64bit gcc.

@johnwcowan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Apr 4, 2019

@liyanfeng662

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 18, 2019

Have you successful run 32 bit executable on WSL OpenSuse? How to configurate it? Would you please share the details? Thanks soooo much!

@liyanfeng662

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 18, 2019

@yanygm

中文

update-binfmts本质是调用了Linux内核,而binfmt_misc属于Linux内核功能。

你可以在centos上编译binfmt-support,或者使用向/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register写入数据获得与update-binfmts相似的功能。

$ mount binfmt_misc -t binfmt_misc /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc 
 # 如果上一行执行后显示错误信息为already mounted,别管就行了。
$ echo :i386:M::'\x7fELF\x01\x01\x01\x03\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x03\x00\x03\x00\x01\x00\x00\x00':'\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xfc\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xf8\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff':/usr/bin/qemu-i386-static: > /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register
 # 按照:name:type:offset:magic:mask:interpreter:flags的格式写入到/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register即可完成增加你想增加的binfmt_misc功能
$ echo 1 > /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/status
 # 开启binfmt_misc功能(无论是否开启)
 # 现在 尝试运行32位程序应该没什么问题了

English translation

The essence of update-binfmts is to call the Linux kernel, and binfmt_misc is a Linux kernel feature.

You can compile binfmt-support on centos, or use the ability to write data to /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register to get similar functionality to update-binfmts.

$ mount binfmt_misc -t binfmt_misc /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc 
 # If the error message is displayed as always `mounted after` the previous line is executed, ignore it.
$ echo :i386:M::'\x7fELF\x01\x01\x01\x03\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x03\x00\x03\x00\x01\x00\x00\x00':'\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xfc\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xf8\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff':/usr/bin/qemu-i386-static: > /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register
 # Write to /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register in the format:name:type:offset:magic:mask:interpreter:flags to increase the binfmt_misc feature you want to add.
$ echo 1 > /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/status
 # Turn on the binfmt_misc function (whether or not it is enabled)
 # Now it’s okay to try to run a 32-Bit elf program.

image

Reference: Kernel Support for miscellaneous (your favourite) Binary Formats v1.1 — The Linux Kernel documentation
Reference: #2468 (comment)

Have you successful run 32 bit executable on WSL OpenSuse? How to configurate it? Would you please share the details? Thanks soooo much!

@liyanfeng662

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 18, 2019

Based on some tinkering I was doing with qemu for some ARM dev, I think I may have found a technique to allow general 32-bit support in WSL. Hat-tip to @therealkenc for the concept 😁
Edit: requires "Fall Creators Update", 1709, build 16299 or newer (I think)
Presuming a fresh Ubuntu WSL instance, you'll need to install the qemu-user-static package, add the i386 binfmt, enable the i386 architecture, update your package lists, and install some i386 packages:

Install qemu and binfmt

sudo apt update
sudo apt install qemu-user-static
sudo update-binfmts --install i386 /usr/bin/qemu-i386-static --magic '\x7fELF\x01\x01\x01\x03\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x03\x00\x03\x00\x01\x00\x00\x00' --mask '\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xfc\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xf8\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff'

[Edit: whoops, need to update package lists, added sudo apt update]
This will activate i386 support by causing them to be executed through qemu-i386-static, and drop a config file into /var/lib/binfmts/ for future reactivation.

You will need to reactivate this every time you restart WSL and want i386 support:

sudo service binfmt-support start

Enable i386 architecture and packages

sudo dpkg --add-architecture i386
sudo apt update
sudo apt install gcc:i386

Try it out

$ file /usr/bin/gcc-5
/usr/bin/gcc-5: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=2637bb7cb85f8f12b40f03cd015d404930c3c790, stripped

$ /usr/bin/gcc-5 --version
gcc-5 (Ubuntu 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.9) 5.4.0 20160609
Copyright (C) 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

$ gcc helloworld.c -o helloworld

$ ./helloworld
Hello, world!

$ file helloworld
helloworld: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=3a0c7be5c6a8d45613e4ef2b7b3474df6224a5da, not stripped

Proof

And to prove it really was working, disable i386 support and try again:

$ sudo service binfmt-support stop
 * Disabling additional executable binary formats binfmt-support [ OK ]

$ ./helloworld
-bash: ./helloworld: cannot execute binary file: Exec format error

This works for me unless I uninstalled previous installed 64bit gcc.

Have you successful run 32 bit executable on WSL OpenSuse? How to configurate it? Would you please share the details? Thanks soooo much!

@liudonghua123

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 18, 2019

waiting for wsl2

@drolevar

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 15, 2019

With WSL2 and Ubuntu 18.04 everything works out of the box.
I only had to run:

sudo dpkg --add-architecture i386
sudo apt-get update

And voila, I could install openjdk-8 in i386:

$ java -version
openjdk version "1.8.0_212"
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_212-8u212-b03-0ubuntu1.18.04.1-b03)
OpenJDK Server VM (build 25.212-b03, mixed mode)
$ cat `which java` | file -
/dev/stdin: ELF 32-bit LSB shared object, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-, for GNU/Linux 3.2.0, BuildID[sha1]=dc5b583579ce5a9e4c34c16d692c1328c645cbb7, stripped
@jerrodrs

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 19, 2019

Using WSL2 and Ubuntu 18.04 I still get "cannot execute binary file: Exec format error".

Are 32 bit binaries supported in WSL2?

@PeterFeicht

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 19, 2019

@jerrodrs did you enable the architecture like @drolevar said?

sudo dpkg --add-architecture i386
sudo apt-get update
@jerrodrs

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 19, 2019

@jerrodrs did you enable the architecture like @drolevar said?

sudo dpkg --add-architecture i386
sudo apt-get update

My mistake, hadn't realized the version failed to set to 2 on my old distro. Now diagnosing that issue. #4103

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
You can’t perform that action at this time.