Re: 32 or 64 bits for the end user.

[Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>]

On 03/21/2011 11:31 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:53:00AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > Been using 64-bit Sid for about 2 years.
> >
> > 64-bit Iceweasel 3.5.17 (in Sid) works great with Flash 10.2r152, but
> > v4.0 (b12 thru rc2 from Experimental, confirmed w/ Mozilla FF) has some
> > "inconsistencies" with Flash.  The 32 bit IW and FF 4.0 beta and rc
> > versions have no such problems.
> >
> > Of course, they happen to be on (some) sites that I want to use...
> >
> > So, when I reinstall Sid in the next few days (boot device is old and
> > spitting out SMART errors), I'm going to install 32-bits.  Once
> > stabilized with the nvidia drivers, I'll probably try a 64 bit kernel to
> > get a larger memory space for my processes (and to be cool).
>
> Thanks.  This seems to be just the kind of intormation I need.  The
> system will be running stable, or testing,

Then you probably won't have these problems.

>                                            so the question becomes: will
> these iceweasel vs flash problems impede iceweasel's transition to
> testing.  My guess is that maybe it won't.
>
> But it looks like 32-bit for normal use is my way to go; sticking 64-bit
> as a dual-boot might help test when it's really ready.

Honestly, for my wife/kids' PC, I installed Ubuntu 10.04LTS with a 
few PPAs.  This way, they get stable libraries but keep current with 
important user apps like FF, vlc, etc.

Since I prefer booting into the CLI and use startx, I stick w/ Sid.

> Is multiarch on the hirizon yet?

The Far Horizon... :(

--
I prefer banana-flavored energy bars made from tofu.