On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 12:05:26AM +0100, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: > On Tue, 2007-11-06 at 13:35 -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 06:58:15PM +0100, Jonas Meurer wrote: > > > Do you have any reasons for that suggestion? Which disadvantages does > > > the amd64 port have on system with up to 2GB of RAM? > > > > A few programs still don't compile or work on 64bit systems (not amd64 > > Any real-world examples? > Even OpenOffice runs as 64bit since months. > The only which I remember rumors are "grub". But being a bootloader,
Grub on Etch amd64 works just fine. > that probably doesn't hurt much. > Fact is that I run pure 64bit Linux since months on my home desktop > (though I'm not the typical desktop user;-). > > > specific, just 64bit system specific), but other than that generally no > > disadvantages. > > > I guess you could say that the fact the programs are slightly bigger > > (since all pointers become 8 bytes rather than 4) is a disadvantage, but > > on the other hand a lot of code runs slightly faster with 64bit, with a > > Yes, x86_64 has more registers than i386. > > > few types of programs running much faster. A few very very pointer > > heavy programs might run slightly slower, although I don't know of any > > where this is the case. > > In short: FUD?! > Len Sorensen knows a lot about running amd64. Consider that before you write off what he says as FUD. > [...] > > The main missing programs seem to be things which are closed source, so > > adobe flash, acrobat reader, etc. Some of these do have more or less > > functional open source replacements. Video codecs can also be a > > Some browsers (konqueror, firefox as far as I've been told) allow to run > 32bit plugins from the 64bit version. Since the flash-plugin and others > is not really important for me, I don't really care. > Well, you're wrong. In Lenny, there's a wrapper that does this but in Etch it doesn't exist and can't be backported. So flash in Etch needs the ia-32 chroot. I don't know if anything else does since I don't use them. > > problems since many are 32bit windows code only. Some people just run > > the few problem programs in a 32bit chroot and deal with it that way, > > Or install 32bit libs and run a 32bit browser/application on the x86_64 > installation. May or may not work, depending on the code and what all libs it needs. > > which seems to make a lot of sense. I suspect pretty soon these > > problems will go away, although it may not happen until windows users > > finally get with the program and start doing 64bit there. > > Yes, but that implies "Vista" there and God knows how compatible (even > to pre-Vista Windoze) the result will be. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
