On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Eli Billauer <[email protected]> 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 > other hand, plugins and other binaries for 64 bits is a headache. Flash > player tops the list, I suppose. > > > So it really makes me wonder: Why are the preinstalled binaries on a 64 bit > machine, well, 64 bit executables? I run a 64 bit machine because I want the > *overall* RAM to exceed 4 GB, but except for virtual machines, I don't > expect any application to have problems with the 32 bit limitation. > > > Insights? > > > There is a performance penalty for running 32-bit on 64-bit, and the extent of it it very much depends both on your processor (Intel/AMD) and your application. > Eli > > > P.S. Just changed my Firefox to 32 bits. Had to install some libraries > manually to get Flash Player going: yum install libpk-gtk-module.so > libcanberra-gtk-module.so libcurl.i686 (thanks goes to strace as usual). > > -- > Web: http://www.billauer.co.il > > ______________________________**_________________ > Haifux mailing list > [email protected] > http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/**mailman/listinfo/haifux<http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux> > -- Orna Agmon Ben-Yehuda. http://ladypine.org
_______________________________________________ Haifux mailing list [email protected] http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haifux
