Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits (Thanks)
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 14:59:00 +0100, pat wrote Hello, I've bought a new laptop with Core 2 Duo processor which is 64 bit. My question is if applications (see below) compiled and running over 64 bits are stable enough or if I should compile for 32 bits. The applications are: - Seamoneky/Firefox - Java - Flash - Audacious - mplayer - VirtualBox/VMware - Qemu - Kerberos/OpenLDAP/OpenSSH (for these I think they are stable) - X.org/fluxbox - system suspending I have 4GB RAM and I know better is to compile for 64 bits, but for me is more important stability. Thanks a lot Pat Thanks for all advices. I'm going to try amd64 and I'll see :-D Thanks Pat
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits (Thanks)
pat a écrit : On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 14:59:00 +0100, pat wrote Hello, I've bought a new laptop with Core 2 Duo processor which is 64 bit. My question is if applications (see below) compiled and running over 64 bits are stable enough or if I should compile for 32 bits. The applications are: - Seamoneky/Firefox - Java - Flash - Audacious - mplayer - VirtualBox/VMware - Qemu - Kerberos/OpenLDAP/OpenSSH (for these I think they are stable) - X.org/fluxbox - system suspending I have 4GB RAM and I know better is to compile for 64 bits, but for me is more important stability. Thanks a lot Pat Thanks for all advices. I'm going to try amd64 and I'll see :-D Thanks Pat I'm using Gentoo AMD64 since at least 2 years. I have no issue just few details: - usually you don't have latest stable versions on x86 you might use the precedent one or unmask the package. - you might install firefox 32 for flashplayer (i tried with the wrapper not buildable yet). For the rest everything is ok ^^
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits (Thanks)
firefox 64bit is unstable for me, and I also think I have a problem w/thunderbird / enigmail. Other than that I'm happily running 2 64bit machines On 12/9/08, pat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 14:59:00 +0100, pat wrote Hello, I've bought a new laptop with Core 2 Duo processor which is 64 bit. My question is if applications (see below) compiled and running over 64 bits are stable enough or if I should compile for 32 bits. The applications are: - Seamoneky/Firefox - Java - Flash - Audacious - mplayer - VirtualBox/VMware - Qemu - Kerberos/OpenLDAP/OpenSSH (for these I think they are stable) - X.org/fluxbox - system suspending I have 4GB RAM and I know better is to compile for 64 bits, but for me is more important stability. Thanks a lot Pat Thanks for all advices. I'm going to try amd64 and I'll see :-D Thanks Pat
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits
2008/12/8 Albert Hopkins [EMAIL PROTECTED]: win32codecs will not work unless it's used by a 32-bit exe (You can run 32-bit apps on x64). By exe I assume you actually mean native binary. And yes, this is correct, but I'm pretty sure there is a win64codecs ebuild too, if I rembember correctly.
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 5:59 AM, pat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I've bought a new laptop with Core 2 Duo processor which is 64 bit. My question is if applications (see below) compiled and running over 64 bits are stable enough or if I should compile for 32 bits. The applications are: - Seamoneky/Firefox - Java - Flash - Audacious - mplayer - VirtualBox/VMware - Qemu - Kerberos/OpenLDAP/OpenSSH (for these I think they are stable) - X.org/fluxbox - system suspending I have 4GB RAM and I know better is to compile for 64 bits, but for me is more important stability. Thanks a lot Pat I think both 32-bit and 64-bit are very stable. I run both here. My input would be that 32-bit Flash and Java are still more compatible with stuff that's out there on the web and I'm generally better of on my wife's 32-bit Gentoo machine than my own 64-bit machine. don't get me wrong - 64-bit works really, really well or I would have dropped it, but if you build 64-bit Gentoo you want to build with multi-lib so you can run 32-bit stuff along the way. Anyway, I'm not the most software technical guy and I don't run much stuff that isn't marked stable so I cannot give you a leading edge view but if I had purchased your hardware I'd build and run 32-bit today and leave a 20GB partition for building 64-bit later. Good luck, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits
On Montag 08 Dezember 2008, pat wrote: Hello, I've bought a new laptop with Core 2 Duo processor which is 64 bit. My question is if applications (see below) compiled and running over 64 bits are stable enough or if I should compile for 32 bits. The applications are: - Seamoneky/Firefox stable - Java stable for years - Flash 32bit+nspluginwrapper works very well - crash of flash does not kill browser, 64bit is said to be a bit more stable - Audacious don't know - mplayer works as good as 32bit - VirtualBox/VMware virtualbox works well - Qemu qemu sucks - in any version independent from 'bitness'. - Kerberos/OpenLDAP/OpenSSH (for these I think they are stable) they are - X.org/fluxbox really no problems there. - system suspending if there are problems they are independent from 32/64bit. I have 4GB RAM and I know better is to compile for 64 bits, but for me is more important stability. if stability is more important for you, go 64bit.
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits
Hello, I have a couple of problems only with proprietary software: real movie videos and flash. The applications are: - Flash Sometimed the nspluginviewer eats the 100% of the CPU. Most of the time it works great, but it's quite annoying. - mplayer I cannot see real movie videos. I don't have many of them (actually just a documentary) so I don't try very hard to find a solution. Hope that helps.
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits
On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 14:59 +0100, pat wrote: Hello, I've bought a new laptop with Core 2 Duo processor which is 64 bit. My question is if applications (see below) compiled and running over 64 bits are stable enough or if I should compile for 32 bits. The applications are: - Seamoneky/Firefox - Java - Flash - Audacious - mplayer - VirtualBox/VMware - Qemu - Kerberos/OpenLDAP/OpenSSH (for these I think they are stable) - X.org/fluxbox - system suspending With very very few exceptions, stability shouldn't be much of an issue for you. It's pretty much the same source code base. What you should be more concerned about is application availability, especially WRT: * if the application is closed-source is there a 64-bit version * have the Gentoo maintainers marked it (yet) for amd64 (stable). Gentoo is (or at least used to be) a bit slower at marking things amd64 just because there are (were) fewer testers. I think this is pretty much a non-issue nowadays. * if it has code optimized in assembler is there optimized x64/compabile assembler. We (well, I) still use the closed-source (well, binary) versions of java. IBM's Java at least has a 64-bit port. Adobe just released a Linux x64 port of Flash (in Alpha). From my experience it's just as stable (or rather unstable) as the x86 version. win32codecs will not work unless it's used by a 32-bit exe (You can run 32-bit apps on x64). System suspending if largely kernel. Anyway probably more than you wanted to know, but I don't think stability is ever really a factor. Linux has supported 64-bit processors for at least 15 years (I think). Usually the only issue (just like running Linux on *any* non-x86 architecture) is the availability of proprietary apps. -a
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 8:59 AM, damian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I have a couple of problems only with proprietary software: real movie videos and flash. The applications are: - Flash Sometimed the nspluginviewer eats the 100% of the CPU. Most of the time it works great, but it's quite annoying. They recently released a 64-bit version of Flash plugin for Linux. I unmerged the nspluginwrapper and unmasked the latest flash plugin and it's working beautifully since. It hasn't crashed/frozen once. - mplayer I cannot see real movie videos. I don't have many of them (actually just a documentary) so I don't try very hard to find a solution. I think all real-related stuff was removed from portage recently. There's a thread on the gentoo forums with explanation of why and instructions how to unmask it if you'd like to get it back. Paul
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits
On Monday 08 December 2008 13:59:00 pat wrote: I've bought a new laptop with Core 2 Duo processor which is 64 bit. My question is if applications (see below) compiled and running over 64 bits are stable enough or if I should compile for 32 bits. I too have a laptop with that processor (it's a Thinkpad T61), and I installed my system from a 64-bit minimal CD with the standard make.profile: $ ls -l /etc/make.profile lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 50 2008-05-27 10:22 /etc/make.profile - ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2007.0 I can't tell you about Flash, but everything else runs flawlessly - even wireless networking. -- Rgds Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits
They recently released a 64-bit version of Flash plugin for Linux. I unmerged the nspluginwrapper and unmasked the latest flash plugin and it's working beautifully since. It hasn't crashed/frozen once. Thanks for the tip! By 'flash plugin' you do you mean this package http://gentoo-portage.com/net-www/netscape-flash ? (just to be sure)
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 11:50 AM, damian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They recently released a 64-bit version of Flash plugin for Linux. I unmerged the nspluginwrapper and unmasked the latest flash plugin and it's working beautifully since. It hasn't crashed/frozen once. Thanks for the tip! By 'flash plugin' you do you mean this package http://gentoo-portage.com/net-www/netscape-flash ? (just to be sure) Yes, that's the one. I'm using this version: net-www/netscape-flash-10.0.20.7_alpha
Re: [gentoo-user] [bit OT] 32 vs. 64 bits
On Monday 08 December 2008 17:09:04 Albert Hopkins wrote: On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 14:59 +0100, pat wrote: Hello, I've bought a new laptop with Core 2 Duo processor which is 64 bit. My question is if applications (see below) compiled and running over 64 bits are stable enough or if I should compile for 32 bits. The applications are: - Seamoneky/Firefox - Java - Flash - Audacious - mplayer - VirtualBox/VMware - Qemu - Kerberos/OpenLDAP/OpenSSH (for these I think they are stable) - X.org/fluxbox - system suspending With very very few exceptions, stability shouldn't be much of an issue for you. It's pretty much the same source code base. What you should be more concerned about is application availability, especially WRT: * if the application is closed-source is there a 64-bit version * have the Gentoo maintainers marked it (yet) for amd64 (stable). Gentoo is (or at least used to be) a bit slower at marking things amd64 just because there are (were) fewer testers. I think this is pretty much a non-issue nowadays. * if it has code optimized in assembler is there optimized x64/compabile assembler. We (well, I) still use the closed-source (well, binary) versions of java. IBM's Java at least has a 64-bit port. Adobe just released a Linux x64 port of Flash (in Alpha). From my experience it's just as stable (or rather unstable) as the x86 version. win32codecs will not work unless it's used by a 32-bit exe (You can run 32-bit apps on x64). System suspending if largely kernel. Anyway probably more than you wanted to know, but I don't think stability is ever really a factor. Linux has supported 64-bit processors for at least 15 years (I think). Usually the only issue (just like running Linux on *any* non-x86 architecture) is the availability of proprietary apps. -a I am using amd64/x86 Gentoo for 3 years. Both of them are really really great. Especially amd64 machine which is my desktop/development can run simply everything. All the mainline applications can run perfect on in So if you want my advise, forget about the x86 and go install amd64. You wont regret it :) -- Markos Chandras
