Re: Intel Core2Duo (T7400)
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.
>
Reply to: