Page 1 of 1
x86 vs 64-bit Ubuntu
Posted: 2007-05-26 06:45pm
by Dominus Atheos
Which is better? The last time I used the 64-bit version it had a lot of problems, but that was a while ago, and I wanted to know if that had changed. Are there even any pros to the 64-bit version?
And while I'm asking questions about Ubuntu, where can I find an iso of the DVD release?
Re: x86 vs 64-bit Ubuntu
Posted: 2007-05-26 07:31pm
by raptor3x
Dominus Atheos wrote:Which is better? The last time I used the 64-bit version it had a lot of problems, but that was a while ago, and I wanted to know if that had changed. Are there even any pros to the 64-bit version?
And while I'm asking questions about Ubuntu, where can I find an iso of the DVD release?
I doubt it will be worth it to switch to 64-bit until standard PC configurations have 4GB or greater or memory. Until then, support for 64-bit is just not there.
Re: x86 vs 64-bit Ubuntu
Posted: 2007-05-26 08:19pm
by Starglider
raptor3x wrote:I doubt it will be worth it to switch to 64-bit until standard PC configurations have 4GB or greater or memory. Until then, support for 64-bit is just not there.
I am using the 64-bit version on all of our servers and two desktops and it works fine. 2GB usable address space is a crippling limitation for most of the AI code I am running and there is a small but noticable performance increase in 64 bit mode (for our code probably due to the extra registers - unlike many OO obsessives I try to minimise pointer use so the doubled pointer size isn't a big issue - though I do use a relatively large amount of long ints and 64-bit bitfield ops as well). Support is fine unless you have really obscure hardware; a major selling point of x86-64 is that all user-space 32-bit software runs perfectly without recompilation.
Posted: 2007-05-26 09:20pm
by Pu-239
Just use 32 bit, there's a fair bit of software that doesn't work well on 64 bit- yes, Linux supports running both 32 and 64 bit apps, but Debian based distros, of which Ubuntu is one, don't support this w/o some manual dicking around, eg for 32 firefox to run the 32 bit only flash, mplayer w/ 32 bit codecs, etc.
Not really worth the effort. I believe Fedora and CentOS support multiarch, as well as Gentoo, but they're not as user friendly.
I thought the maximum address space was 4G on 32bit mode, not 2G?
As for DVD images:
http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/dvd/current/
I would just get a CD image and download the rest- you probably won't use most of the stuff on the DVD, and it'll take longer to download. The DVD installer does have more installer options on a single disc though (eg the alternate installer which I like to use, since the GUI installer blows chunks (doesn't support LVM/RAID)).
Posted: 2007-05-27 02:29am
by Resinence
Pu-239 wrote:Just use 32 bit, there's a fair bit of software that doesn't work well on 64 bit- yes, Linux supports running both 32 and 64 bit apps, but Debian based distros, of which Ubuntu is one, don't support this w/o some manual dicking around, eg for 32 firefox to run the 32 bit only flash, mplayer w/ 32 bit codecs, etc.
Ummm.... sudo apt-get install ia32-libs... there, you can run 32bit stuff... then it's just a matter of downloading the 32bit firefox and installing it or adding the 32bit repositories. It's some extra work yeah, but any stupid moron can follow one of the 5000 guides on ubuntuforums.org.
Posted: 2007-05-27 02:56am
by Uraniun235
Maybe in the future we could have
all user guide documentation located in forums!
Posted: 2007-05-27 05:06am
by Ace Pace
Uraniun235 wrote:Maybe in the future we could have
all user guide documentation located in forums!
Actully, it might be better if in the future, Linux had these things documented.
Posted: 2007-05-27 09:35am
by Starglider
Pu-239 wrote:I thought the maximum address space was 4G on 32bit mode, not 2G?
Total virtual address space yes, but by default half of that is reserved as kernel address space. You have to mess about with settings on both Windows and Linux to increase it, and AFAIK you still can't get it above 3GiB.
Posted: 2007-05-27 07:55pm
by Pu-239
Hrm, doesn't look like the case AFAIK from
http://kerneltrap.org/node/2450
Posted: 2007-05-27 08:02pm
by Pu-239
Resinence wrote:Pu-239 wrote:Just use 32 bit, there's a fair bit of software that doesn't work well on 64 bit- yes, Linux supports running both 32 and 64 bit apps, but Debian based distros, of which Ubuntu is one, don't support this w/o some manual dicking around, eg for 32 firefox to run the 32 bit only flash, mplayer w/ 32 bit codecs, etc.
Ummm.... sudo apt-get install ia32-libs... there, you can run 32bit stuff... then it's just a matter of downloading the 32bit firefox and installing it or adding the 32bit repositories. It's some extra work yeah, but any stupid moron can follow one of the 5000 guides on ubuntuforums.org.
Yeah, but what if I want to be lazy?
Plus again, debian based distros don't have proper multiarch- the 32 bit repos are a dirty hack, since the package manager isn't actually aware the apps are 32 bits, plus the repos are 3rd party. I guess practically it really doesn't matter....
As for lack of documentation- it's not there since it's a 3rd party hack.
As for documentation regarding pirated codecs which are the most common use of 3rd party repos, it's because they're not really legal - codecs are repackaged violating EULA (same situation w/ CCCP for windows really, linux people are just more careful about being sued. ).