Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Proposal To Go 64-bit Only With Fedora 23

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    sipping stale coffe

    Originally posted by Adarion View Post
    On the energy consumption discussion.

    Of course if you use the old P4 heating plate to compare it...
    You can increase its efficiency when you place your mug on the psu.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by nanonyme View Post
      Then please protest when the distro of your choice is making this decision. Demanding distros you don't use must support 32bit is rather self-centered.
      Oh, come on, does everything nowadys have to be specific to what a person uses/does and needs multiple citations, facts, links, etc...? I'm not demanding anything, I'm just stating that dropping x86_32 now, in any distro, is not a good idea and I give reasons why I think so.

      Your demand, that I only speak when something concerns directly my distro of choice, is just a rude way to cut a person out of a discussion, based on no real reasons, and I will not comply with it.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by Cyber Killer View Post
        Oh, come on, does everything nowadys have to be specific to what a person uses/does and needs multiple citations, facts, links, etc...? I'm not demanding anything, I'm just stating that dropping x86_32 now, in any distro, is not a good idea and I give reasons why I think so.

        Your demand, that I only speak when something concerns directly my distro of choice, is just a rude way to cut a person out of a discussion, based on no real reasons, and I will not comply with it.
        Dropping 32bit support is a good thing because it drops the necessary kernel driver testing for a distro to half. It is blatantly moronic all distros need to waste effort on testing 32bit just because one user of one distro needs it. Your reasons don't really have to do with facts, you're just assuming that if even a single distro drops support for an arch, all of the hundreds of distros will follow suit. This is just blatantly incorrect based on current situation. Not all distros support same archs even as is. Fine, it might be the distro you're using is under resourced and happy to drop 32bit right now but that still has nothing to do with Fedora.
        Note if x86 is not made a secondary arch but dropped in Fedora, it says clearly *no one* in that camp gives a crap about it. Eg PPC32 lived pretty long as a secondary Fedora arch

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by Nille View Post
          Why only the Black and White thinking. I would abandon the 32bit Only installations and let run the 32bit Apps only as Multiarch. Comercial Software Ventors can modify there Software for 64bit in the next time. In 2 or 3 Years they can Drop the official 32bit Packages.
          No they can't because 32bit games...they will never be ported to 64bit.

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by AJSB View Post
            No they can't because 32bit games...they will never be ported to 64bit.
            This games comes most times with its own library in its main directory. So after some time you can reduce the 32bit Support to runtime only (like Mesa)

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by Aguazul View Post
              I run a 64-bit Debian system, but I run 32-bit executables for Firefox and Google Chrome using multi-arch. The memory use of browsers really is almost half when running 32-bit. This makes a big difference with a lot of tabs open. I think there is an excellent case for running 32-bit executables for certain apps when you don't need to access multi-gigabytes of RAM in any single process.
              Sure, if all you care about is RAM usage.. But if you care about performance (extra registers, new instruction sets etc) and having software that is better tested (it has been reported that there are no kernel developers still running x86-32, and I doubt there are many chrome or Firefox devs still using 32 bit) then 64-bit makes more sense.

              The arguments about old laptops really aren't that important. The only significant segment of that market which can't do 64-bit is Pentium M, which is a decade old, and apart from that these laptops aren't great with modern distributions and desktops. Most struggle with drivers - Nvidia and ATI no longer support those old chipsets with their proprietary drivers, so you're out of luck unless you have Intel or something supported by the old ATI open source drivers. In particular there were millions of laptops with old SiS video chipsets which no longer work even with open source drivers, and nobody has bothered to figure out why.

              I'm not suggesting that these old laptops should be thrown in the bin, just that it would be more appropriate to use a minimal distribution that targets and cares about performance on old slow hardware. Something like TinyLinux that can run in 64mb. A lot of these old systems only have 256 or 512mb RAM, which isn't even enough to run the Ubuntu installer these days.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by chrisb View Post
                I'm not suggesting that these old laptops should be thrown in the bin, just that it would be more appropriate to use a minimal distribution that targets and cares about performance on old slow hardware. Something like TinyLinux that can run in 64mb. A lot of these old systems only have 256 or 512mb RAM, which isn't even enough to run the Ubuntu installer these days.
                Tinycore, Puppy, and other low-end targeted distros are not systems for n00b users. I wouldn't give such OS to e.g. my parents. A normal distro, with e.g. xfce + Firefox on the other hand is very usable and the interface is falimiar, and it runs smoothly on 1GB of ram, which most of these machines have already, cause 0,5GB is not usable today even on clean winxp with an antivirus and any web browser (+multiple autoupdate services running in the background which get installed with most applications).

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by The Walking Glitch View Post
                  Holy shit the ignorance in this thread is astounding. Consider me the resident computer hardware expert from now on. There were many Pentium 4 systems with 4 DDR slots, which means they can use 4GB of RAM with an OS that supports PAE. I have a 500Mhz Powermac G4 with 1.25GB of RAM that other than being really slow works fine as a daily driver with OS X Tiger. It would also work fine on Linux if I bothered to spend hours and hours setting Debian up; MintPPC did all of the hard work for you, but the author won't be spinning a new version himself in the near future, and it really needs it.
                  How many Pentium 4 systems shipped with 4gb of ram? Is it worth the time and effort to acquire a P4 system and then try to upgrade the ram so that it is sufficient to run a modern desktop, given that the resulting system will be less powerful than a modern phone? And remember that PAE sucked and many motherboard vendors never even certified their hardware to be PAE compatible (sure the old Dell server will do it fine, but random home build PC?).. Torvalds: PAE sucks

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by chrisb View Post
                    How many Pentium 4 systems shipped with 4gb of ram? Is it worth the time and effort to acquire a P4 system and then try to upgrade the ram so that it is sufficient to run a modern desktop, given that the resulting system will be less powerful than a modern phone? And remember that PAE sucked and many motherboard vendors never even certified their hardware to be PAE compatible (sure the old Dell server will do it fine, but random home build PC?).. Torvalds: PAE sucks
                    PAE doesn't suck....in office,etc. is slower than 64bit, yes, but with (some) 32bit games its faster than running those games in 64bit multilib.

                    PAE worked in all modern MoBos that i ever tried to do so and i try in every single new model i have the chance to use it just to make sure....if Mobo is certified or not to use PAE, i honestly don't give a f**k about it...how many consumer MoBos are certifified for Linux anyway ?....right.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by Nille View Post
                      This games comes most times with its own library in its main directory. So after some time you can reduce the 32bit Support to runtime only (like Mesa)
                      That is not true and there are several (relatively) new games in Steam that are 32bit and when installing in 64bit distro complaint about missing libs....and the missing libs are the 32bit versions.

                      I had to manually install those 32bit libs no matter 64bit versions were installed.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X