32bit vs 64bit Linux

[Lisa Kachold]

Yes!

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:39 AM, kitepilot at kitepilot.com <
kitepilot at 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
>
I believe we are arguing semantics?

"fixed" them!

The process for installation of any native 32 bit applications would, of
course, include the installation of the required libraries.

They do not need "fixing"?


>
>
> Lisa Kachold writes:
>
>> This is patently incorrect:
>> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:44 AM, kitepilot at kitepilot.com <
>> kitepilot at 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 at 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 at lists.phxlinux.****org<
>>>>> PLUG-discuss at lists.**phxlinux.org <PLUG-discuss at 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>
>>>>> <**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 at nmecs.com)
>>>> Systems Administration / Web Application Development
>>>> Information Security Consulting
>>>> (480) 559.9681
>>>>
>>> ------------------------------****---------------------
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.phxlinux.****org<
>>> PLUG-discuss at lists.**phxlinux.org <PLUG-discuss at 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>
>>> <**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 <http://it-clowns.com/d/>
>> Chief Clown
>>
> ------------------------------**---------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.phxlinux.**org<PLUG-discuss at 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 <http://it-clowns.com/d/>
Chief Clown
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.phxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20130531/c9d21557/attachment.html>