I knew that 32 bit OS uses less ram space than 64 bit. ------ In normal mode Uruk 2.0_64 (beta 1) uses > 575mb Uruk 2.0_i686 (beta 2) uses > > 545mb --------------- But in previous Uruk 1.0_64 uses > 450mb Uruk 1.0_i686 uses > 300mb --------------- I was happy with Uruk 1.0. But It is not up-to-date now. --------Uruk 2.0 up-to-date. But it is suitable for >4gb ram. (my ram= 2gb)
I have downloaded uruk 2.0 (Beta 2)- 32 bit, hope that it will use less ram
memory than Uruk 2.0_64 (beta 1). I am frustrated. Because they uses same
usage of memory.
- [Trisquel-users] Re : uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 pinmaritim
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 greatgnu
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 dahunt
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 pablo96es
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 sknc1982
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 dahunt
- [Trisquel-users] Re : uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 sigdpsy
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 greatgnu
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 sigdpsy
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 sigdpsy
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 sigdpsy
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 sigdpsy
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 sigdpsy
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 megver83
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 sigdpsy
- Re: [Trisquel-users] uruk gnu/linux 2.0 beta-2 hd-scania
