Is there really any 32 bit only software that people still use? I don't think I've needed 32-bit libraries in years. Paul Mooring Operations Engineer www.opscode.com ________________________________________ From: plug-discuss-bounces@lists.phxlinux.org on behalf of kitepilot@kitepilot.com Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 10:44 AM To: nathan@nmecs.com; Main PLUG discussion list Subject: Re: 32bit vs 64bit Linux Yes, you can get 'pure 64' systems (think Red Hat). And you can 'fix them' by installing the hybrid 32-bit libraries, but I'd rather stay away from it. ET Nathan England writes: > > > > > I'll expand *your* question! > > Are there any *pure* 64-bit OS options out there? Beyond a linux from scratch > build, which I have currently that is still pure 64-bit, what is there? > every distro I know of has 32-bit libraries band-aided on to make some 32-bit that > refuses to die run. > > Nathan > > > > > On Friday, May 31, 2013 13:32:55 kitepilot@kitepilot.com wrote: >> Well, I'll expand the question... >> Performance and memory access considerations aside, the reason why I have >> always 'gone 32' is because applications availability. Back when, flash was >> the limiting factor because it was a PAIN to run it in 64 bits (if at all >> possible). >> And some other things... >> >> For years, I've been lazily sticking to 32 bits to avoid potentially >> problematic issues. Now, if that landscape has changed, and >> application-wise 32 and 64 bits are irrelevant, I'd certainly like to >> convert to 64. >> >> Question is (again, performance and memory access considerations aside): >> What are the potential problems of running on a pure 64 environment for as >> long as you stick to apt-get (or yum)? >> ET >> >> keith smith writes: >> > Hi, >> > >> > Even though I have 64bit hardware I always install the 32bit version of >> > Linux. I do so because of the past discussions on this list that made me >> > believe the 32bit OS was better because 64bit caching is actually slower >> > due to the requirement that the cache be filled to a certain point before >> > it is moved. I think I recall something about the amount of RAM having >> > some effect here also. >> > >> > Using a 32bit version over a 64bit version seems counter intuitive, >> > however that is what I have taken away from these conversations about >> > 32bit vs 64bit Linux. >> > >> > I'm using CentOS 6.x on a LAMP server that gets a low amount of traffic. >> > However I may make the jump to Linux on my desktop this summer. (this >> > will be my 3rd attempt to become M$ free except one VM so I can use IE >> > for testing) I think all of my hardware is 64bit. >> > >> > So that begs the question, is 32bit better than 64bit or do I not >> > understand the issue? >> > >> > Thank you for your feedback. >> > >> > Keith >> > >> > ------------------------ >> > >> > Keith Smith >> >> --------------------------------------------------- >> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > -- > > > > Regards, > > Nathan England > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > NME Computer Services http://www.nmecs.com > Nathan England (nathan@nmecs.com) > Systems Administration / Web Application Development > Information Security Consulting > (480) 559.9681 > --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss