This is patently incorrect: On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:44 AM, kitepilot@kitepilot.com < kitepilot@kitepilot.com> wrote: > 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 > CentOs 6 using regular repo used both 32bit and 64 bit libraries - seamlessly. There is no reason to "fix" anything in modern linux distributions. There once was, however this is no longer a factor. > > 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 > -- (503) 754-4452 Android (623) 239-3392 Skype (623) 688-3392 Google Voice ** it-clowns.com Chief Clown