> > Jason LaPier wrote: > > > Also, I may be a tad stubborn. So don't bother trying to > convince me I > > wouldn't be able to tell the difference between Firefox > compiled for > > 64-bit and FF compiled for 32-bit. > > Obviously, you can tell the difference. The 64-bit binary is > the one with no Flash support. (-: > > -- > Bob Miller K<bob> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I withdraw my request. I kinda like having one version of Firefox that doesn't support Flash. And seriously tho, nobody got my back on 64-bit Linux? Are we all turning into Mac users? I know it's not literally twice as fast as 32-bit, but it's faster, and how can you put a 64-bit CPU in a machine and run it at anything less? Just doesn't seem like the DIY way... _______________________________________________ EUGLUG mailing list euglug@euglug.org http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug
