64 bit slackware
in [Slackware]
|
From: peter.fastre on 23 Apr 2008 04:41 Hello I know this question has been dealt with in the past, I've read a lot of threads about Slackware supporting an official 64-bit release in the future or not. Many discussions are becoming old though, we're April 2008 now, and almost all new hardware is 64-bit, and 64-bit OS'es are becoming more and more mainstream. Except Slackware... I know about Slamd64 and other forks. But no matter how much sympathy I have for these projects, I've never seen someone saying that he/she would use for example Slamd64 on a production server. Yes, it's fun to try it on a laptop and seeing it performing a few percents better than the 32-bit. For me, it's different. I'm using Slackware for many years now on servers because of its simplicity, stability, and also because its philosophy. I've tried Ubuntu, Debian, Redhat, ... don't like them. But it's becoming difficult. As I'm currently using Xen on all my servers, I do experience some problems with Slackware. First, I have to compile Xen with the PAE-thing, to support all the memory in the server (typically there's more than 8GB in a server). That's not a big problem, though. The second problem I have, is some strange thing about Xen and TLS-binaries, which required my to recompile the complete libc6 library. Allthough it's working now for two years (I'm still running slackware 11 with xen 3.04), it's a lot of work I'll have to do when switching to slackware 12 and xen 3.2. These 2 problems simply don't exist on 64-bit distributions. I really would like to stick with Slackware. But what about the future? When will Slackware finally evolve to a 64-bit architecture? What's the official statement *today* about this? If there are plans to move to 64, I'd be glad to go through the pain of using the 32-bit version for some time now. If Slackware isn't planning this, I think it will be becoming more and more marginal. Eventually, everyone will have to move to another distribution like this. Regards Peter
From: Eef Hartman on 23 Apr 2008 05:39 peter.fastre(a)gmail.com <peter.fastre(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I know this question has been dealt with in the past, I've read a lot > of threads about Slackware supporting an official 64-bit release in > the future or not. Many discussions are becoming old though, we're > April 2008 now, and almost all new hardware is 64-bit, and 64-bit > OS'es are becoming more and more mainstream. Actually I find the 64-bit a mixed blessing: for my job I now have to work (and port packages) in openSUSE 64-bits, but it leads to a lot of problems. One of them is Firefox/Seamonkey: openSUSE delivers them in a 64-bit version, but the Netscape plugin interface has only been defined for 32-bits and a LOT of the plugins, especially Java and Flash ARE currently only available in 32-bits (there is a 64-bits JDK 6 SE, but it doesn't include the browser plugin and/or most of the JRE it relies on). For some plugins openSUSE includes 64-bits "wrappers", to be able to still use them, but not for Java (and the, very important here, Citrix/Cica plugin). So I had to install a 32-bit version of Firefox, but THAT one then doesn't work anymore with the 64-bits media players (like Totem, included in openSUSE, or the VLC player). This probably will not be resolved until Firefox 3 comes out, and maybe not even then, because FlashPlayer, Adobe Acrobat and all that stuff will have to be in 64-bits too. Also a lot of older packages don't work (or don't work well) with 64-bits O/S, unless you install almost all of the 32-bits (including legacy) libraries too (like libstdc++-3, in two different versions, or even libstdc++.so.2.9), and no, they don't come standard with openSUSE although someone DID make packages for them. For another package the PC will have to go back to openSUSE 32-bit, as it needs too much 32-bit support, some of which conflicts WITH the 64-bit O/S itself. -- ******************************************************************** ** Eef Hartman, Delft University of Technology, dept. EWI/TW ** ** e-mail: E.J.M.Hartman(a)math.tudelft.nl, fax: +31-15-278 7295 ** ** snail-mail: P.O. Box 5031, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands ** ********************************************************************
From: peter.fastre on 23 Apr 2008 07:37 On 23 apr, 11:39, Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hart...(a)math.tudelft.nl> wrote: > peter.fas...(a)gmail.com <peter.fas...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I know this question has been dealt with in the past, I've read a lot > > of threads about Slackware supporting an official 64-bit release in > > the future or not. Many discussions are becoming old though, we're > > April 2008 now, and almost all new hardware is 64-bit, and 64-bit > > OS'es are becoming more and more mainstream. > > Actually I find the 64-bit a mixed blessing: > for my job I now have to work (and port packages) in openSUSE 64-bits, > but it leads to a lot of problems. > ... That's true. If you have tried Windows XP 64 you experience similar problems. But aren't they all caused by people or companies which fail to provide decent, up-to-date versions of their software? I'm not using Linux on the desktop (that's another discussion), and on the server side I experience the opposite problem as you do. In my opinion, servers would benefit from 64-bit OS'es. Even Windows has made the step: almost all new Windows servers are delivered with Windows 2003 x64... Peter
From: marksouth on 23 Apr 2008 16:05 On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:41:50 -0700, peter.fastre(a)gmail.com wrote: > I know this question has been dealt with in the past, I've read a lot of > threads about Slackware supporting an official 64-bit release in the > future or not. Many discussions are becoming old though, we're April > 2008 now, and almost all new hardware is 64-bit, *Almost* all? It would be pretty hard to find a new 32-bit PC, unless you count the eeepc (not that I don't adore mine :-). > and 64-bit OS'es are > becoming more and more mainstream. Except Slackware... I know about > Slamd64 and other forks. But no matter how much sympathy I have for > these projects, I've never seen someone saying that he/she would use for > example Slamd64 on a production server. I don't think they tend to see themselves as forks, Slamd64 and BlueWhite seem to see themselves as providing a service to the Slackware community that isn't yet part of the mainstream service provided by PV. > Yes, it's fun to try it on a > laptop and seeing it performing a few percents better than the 32-bit. Or possibly the other way round, depending on what you are doing. > For me, it's different. I'm using Slackware for many years now on > servers because of its simplicity, stability, and also because its > philosophy. I've tried Ubuntu, Debian, Redhat, ... don't like them. But > it's becoming difficult. (Xen stuff snipped.) > I really would like to stick with Slackware. But what > about the future? When will Slackware finally evolve to a 64-bit > architecture? Going by the way that PV has handled other changes, I would expect the answer to be: sometime after everyone else has made all the mistakes and when it is easy to make the change. > What's the official statement *today* about this? Well, I can't speak for Slackware Inc. > If there > are plans to move to 64, I'd be glad to go through the pain of using the > 32-bit version for some time now. If Slackware isn't planning this, I > think it will be becoming more and more marginal. Eventually, everyone > will have to move to another distribution like this. It'll happen. When everyone else has done it. And there are millions of 32-bit machines that will continue to need a reliable distro for at least a decade to come. Just be patient. Good things come to those who wait, and the meek shall inherit the earth. (**) Mark (**) Well, I'm glad to hear they're getting something at last, 'cos they've had such a terrible time of it until now. To misquote M. Python. -- No sig found anywhere under /.
From: Keith Keller on 23 Apr 2008 16:24 On 2008-04-23, peter.fastre(a)gmail.com <peter.fastre(a)gmail.com> wrote: > What's the official statement *today* about this? If you want an official statement, you're asking the wrong people. Try http://slackware.com/contact/ --keith -- kkeller-usenet(a)wombat.san-francisco.ca.us (try just my userid to email me) AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt see X- headers for PGP signature information
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 Prev: Alt.OS.Linux.Slackware FAQ pointer Next: NVIDIA binaries and kernel 2.6.25 |