On Sun, Aug 21, 2011, Tzafrir Cohen wrote about Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit
applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit?machines:
Another thing I forgot:
Try building Firefox (with debug information and such). IIRC you'll need
more than 4GB of memory space. And this is far from being the only
program
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011, Orna Agmon Ben-Yehuda wrote about Re: [Haifux] Running
32 bit applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines:
I forgot to mention that sometimes, on really funny occasions, you get a
performance penalty from using the 64bit code. For example, when you take a
number close to 1
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 09:36:59PM +0300, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 07:32:29PM +0300, Eli Billauer wrote:
It's not like I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM.
There's no 1GB of RAM limitation with 32 bit. Perhaps you meant 4GB of
RAM?
So it really makes me
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011, guy keren wrote about Re: [Haifux] Running 32 bit
applications (Firefox?) on 64 bit machines:
because this is progress - to move to a 64-bit operating system, and
running all the applications in 64-bit mode.
Indeed. I'm amazed every time somebody tells me he just had
Thank you all for your answers.
I suppose the conclusion is that using 32 bits for application is a nice
workaround for applications that cause trouble as 64 bits, unless it's
really computation intensive (simulations etc.). Maintaining the
necessary 32 bit libraries is a not fun, but nothing
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 07:32:29PM +0300, Eli Billauer wrote:
Hi,
It has suddenly hit me, that there's no apparent reason to run most
executables as 64 bits on a x86_64 machine. I mean, what for? It's not
like I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM. If it does, let it crash.
On the
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 6:40 PM, Eli Billauer e...@billauer.co.il wrote:
Thank you all for your answers.
I suppose the conclusion is that using 32 bits for application is a nice
workaround for applications that cause trouble as 64 bits, unless it's
really computation intensive (simulations
Hi,
It has suddenly hit me, that there's no apparent reason to run most
executables as 64 bits on a x86_64 machine. I mean, what for? It's not
like I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM. If it does, let it crash.
On the other hand, plugins and other binaries for 64 bits is a headache.
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 07:32:29PM +0300, Eli Billauer wrote:
It's not like I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM.
There's no 1GB of RAM limitation with 32 bit. Perhaps you meant 4GB of
RAM?
So it really makes me wonder: Why are the preinstalled binaries on a
64 bit machine, well, 64 bit
because this is progress - to move to a 64-bit operating system, and
running all the applications in 64-bit mode.
mixing between 32-bit and 64-bit is not such a good idea.
and why do you think firefox doesn't get above 1GB of RAM?
on my system it currently takes 1.2GB of virtual memory (with
At least in Debian you can install an x86 32 bit arch and later on install a
64 bit kernel to get what you want. All apps will be 32 bit but the kernel
will run in 64 bits. There are moves underfoot to make Debian multiarch
enabled and then you'll be able to run 32 bit and 64 bit apps on the same
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Eli Billauer e...@billauer.co.il wrote:
Hi,
It has suddenly hit me, that there's no apparent reason to run most
executables as 64 bits on a x86_64 machine. I mean, what for? It's not like
I expect Firefox to address 1 GB of RAM. If it does, let it crash. On
12 matches
Mail list logo
