Re: Broken applications: Could we be honest?
Art Edwards wrote:
> This brought up the question, who uses 64 bit Linux anyway?
Well, me, and that's all I really care about.
> It can't be the desktop
> community, seeing that the standard office tool doesn't really
> work for 64-bit.
TeX works perfectly for me. 1/2 :-)
> Besides the instruction set, which
> can probably give some speed, but wouldn't justify the cost,
Before I bought my machine (18 months ago, now) I benchmarked it
on the code that I use. It was 10 times faster than my old 500 MHz
Pentium-III, and 30% faster than an equivalently available/priced
> Unless such core pieces as the debugging tool (ddd) and the data display
> tool (xmgrace) are working, it is dishonest to pretend that the 64-bit
> version is ready for testing.
Your core pieces are not my core pieces. When I got started on
this machine, I did indeed find a few hiccups. I debugged them,
turned in patches, and now they work fine for everyone.
I humbly suggest that you roll up your sleeves, and make your
core tools work. I think you will find this community is
helpful, capable, and knowledgeable.
> It would be very nice if you, and other distro's, were to put
> appropriate caveats on the websites, saying that 64-bit is really
> not ready for the prime-time desktop.
Go to bugs.debian.com, punch in the packages that you find essential,
and see if any of them have RC bugs. It's even easier now than
it used to be, since bugs on amd64 are now considered RC.
I don't know of any distribution that considers amd64 unimportant.