I have had to install the 32 bit compatibility libraries before in a couple of different flavors. I have yet to see anything negative from doing this. and the positive my 32 bit application is much happier for it as well. On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:39 AM, kitepilot@kitepilot.com < kitepilot@kitepilot.com> wrote: > Lisa, what I was referring to specifically is 'Red Hat Enterprise Linux > Server release 6.4 (Santiago)' (from /etc/issue) > Those boxes '64-bit' boxes were unable to run 32-bit applications until I > installed the 32-bit libraries. > They technically were 'pure 64' until I 'fixed' them by installing such > libraries... :-) > ET > > > Lisa Kachold writes: > >> 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< >>>>> PLUG-discuss@lists.**phxlinux.org > >>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/****mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>> <**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< >>> PLUG-discuss@lists.**phxlinux.org > >>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/****mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>> <**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 >> > ------------------------------**--------------------- > 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 > -- A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. Stephen