Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:00:41 -0700 Mark Knecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:22 AM, Jamie Dobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been away from Gentoo for the last year or so and using Ubuntu but find that I want to return to Gentoo simply because of the level of customization that I can do with it. Well then, welcome back. SNIP Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? I run an amd64 as my desktop system. It' started as my 3rd machine so at the time it was 64-bit for fun. today I just live with it. There are some limitations on the 64-bit platform with web-based media, but beyond that I find 32 and 64-bit machines to be pretty similar in performance. I run old windows games under Wine on 64-bit and they work OK. I think Flash and Java have been the two larger issues for me over time. A few win32codec issues also. However if I wanted to get around those I could probably do something in a chroot but I'm not that motivated. If I was building a desktop machine today I wouldn't build 64-bit. I see no advantage and a few disadvantages, but either way you go you'll probably be fine. I use a 64 bit myself and have done so ever since I got tired of running 32bit and wasting half my CPU. I recommend running a 32bit firefox, but other than that, there's no real problems here. Wine seems to run a little better in 64 bit than I've seen it perform on other systems but it's hard to be sure. Anyhow, just wanted to say I switched from 64 to 32 originally, as Mark suggested, and switched back very quickly. I don't know if the speed really changed, but it made me feel better about myself. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Dan Farrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:00:41 -0700 Mark Knecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:22 AM, Jamie Dobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been away from Gentoo for the last year or so and using Ubuntu but find that I want to return to Gentoo simply because of the level of customization that I can do with it. Well then, welcome back. SNIP Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? I run an amd64 as my desktop system. It' started as my 3rd machine so at the time it was 64-bit for fun. today I just live with it. There are some limitations on the 64-bit platform with web-based media, but beyond that I find 32 and 64-bit machines to be pretty similar in performance. I run old windows games under Wine on 64-bit and they work OK. I think Flash and Java have been the two larger issues for me over time. A few win32codec issues also. However if I wanted to get around those I could probably do something in a chroot but I'm not that motivated. If I was building a desktop machine today I wouldn't build 64-bit. I see no advantage and a few disadvantages, but either way you go you'll probably be fine. I use a 64 bit myself and have done so ever since I got tired of running 32bit and wasting half my CPU. I recommend running a 32bit firefox, but other than that, there's no real problems here. Wine seems to run a little better in 64 bit than I've seen it perform on other systems but it's hard to be sure. Anyhow, just wanted to say I switched from 64 to 32 originally, as Mark suggested, and switched back very quickly. I don't know if the speed really changed, but it made me feel better about myself. It's an interesting question and one I've not tried to test. Does an AMD64 machine running a 32-bit or 64-bit install run faster or slower with one or the other. For all of my everyday work - Gnome, Firefox, web browsing, email, MythTV, etc., it's been my assumption that there wouldn't be any noticeble difference. I run 64-bit but assume I'd run at more or less the same speed if I ran 32-bit. I may be wrong. Anyone have any measured data? Same machine, two installs? I should see about 1) getting my chroot working again and then 2) getting it to boot and doing a check. Thanks, Mark -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 just go 4x4 :D 16 CPU's and 128G of ram drool Dale wrote: | Neil Bothwick wrote: | On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:39:39 +0100, KH wrote: | | | only thing I found out until now is that flash is not working. Maybe | this is fixed by now. | | | Install nspluginwrapper and the vast majority of flash sites work. | | | | | | Progress is being made then. The last I heard the vast majority of | software worked so maybe by the time I can build a rig it will be 100% | working. is my issue right now. | | I would love to build a rig with two dual core CPUs, 4 cores in all. | Compile times would be pretty short. ;-) Woo Ooo. | | Dale | | :-) :-) :-) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH2s2C8hUIAnGfls4RApjwAJ0Z6XRw4vtbXz94Iu733nxO6Q++BwCfdDnd Tdrc2qtZM71ku4u63si1O64= =xD7X -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:06:07 -0700 Mark Knecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Dan Farrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:00:41 -0700 Mark Knecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:22 AM, Jamie Dobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been away from Gentoo for the last year or so and using Ubuntu but find that I want to return to Gentoo simply because of the level of customization that I can do with it. Well then, welcome back. SNIP Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? I run an amd64 as my desktop system. It' started as my 3rd machine so at the time it was 64-bit for fun. today I just live with it. There are some limitations on the 64-bit platform with web-based media, but beyond that I find 32 and 64-bit machines to be pretty similar in performance. I run old windows games under Wine on 64-bit and they work OK. I think Flash and Java have been the two larger issues for me over time. A few win32codec issues also. However if I wanted to get around those I could probably do something in a chroot but I'm not that motivated. If I was building a desktop machine today I wouldn't build 64-bit. I see no advantage and a few disadvantages, but either way you go you'll probably be fine. I use a 64 bit myself and have done so ever since I got tired of running 32bit and wasting half my CPU. I recommend running a 32bit firefox, but other than that, there's no real problems here. Wine seems to run a little better in 64 bit than I've seen it perform on other systems but it's hard to be sure. Anyhow, just wanted to say I switched from 64 to 32 originally, as Mark suggested, and switched back very quickly. I don't know if the speed really changed, but it made me feel better about myself. It's an interesting question and one I've not tried to test. Does an AMD64 machine running a 32-bit or 64-bit install run faster or slower with one or the other. For all of my everyday work - Gnome, Firefox, web browsing, email, MythTV, etc., it's been my assumption that there wouldn't be any noticeble difference. for all of the above, the cpu probably isn't going to effect you either way. Network/Hard disk is likely to be the bottleneck for all of them. MythTV uses an SQL backend and should benefit a little from 64 bit - databases are one of the few places that really benefit from those extra bits, not sure why. GIMP also seems to benefit a little, as does encoding pretty much any media (especially video). I'd imagine that inkscape and blender, etc. would also benefit significantly. But these results aren't tested, just mildly observed. I run 64-bit but assume I'd run at more or less the same speed if I ran 32-bit. I may be wrong. Anyone have any measured data? Same machine, two installs? I never measured anything, but I wouldn't expect to see too much of a difference. If you want to waste your processor's registers, go 32 bit. If you want to jump through hoops to deal with the greater web community (flash, java, etc) go 64 bit. Those are the downsides of each. I highly recommend multilib, though I never chroot into a native 32bit environment. You'll want to run a few of your programs 32bit, probably. But the two get together really well. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 12:56 PM, Dan Farrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:06:07 -0700 Mark Knecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Dan Farrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:00:41 -0700 Mark Knecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:22 AM, Jamie Dobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been away from Gentoo for the last year or so and using Ubuntu but find that I want to return to Gentoo simply because of the level of customization that I can do with it. Well then, welcome back. SNIP Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? I run an amd64 as my desktop system. It' started as my 3rd machine so at the time it was 64-bit for fun. today I just live with it. There are some limitations on the 64-bit platform with web-based media, but beyond that I find 32 and 64-bit machines to be pretty similar in performance. I run old windows games under Wine on 64-bit and they work OK. I think Flash and Java have been the two larger issues for me over time. A few win32codec issues also. However if I wanted to get around those I could probably do something in a chroot but I'm not that motivated. If I was building a desktop machine today I wouldn't build 64-bit. I see no advantage and a few disadvantages, but either way you go you'll probably be fine. I use a 64 bit myself and have done so ever since I got tired of running 32bit and wasting half my CPU. I recommend running a 32bit firefox, but other than that, there's no real problems here. Wine seems to run a little better in 64 bit than I've seen it perform on other systems but it's hard to be sure. Anyhow, just wanted to say I switched from 64 to 32 originally, as Mark suggested, and switched back very quickly. I don't know if the speed really changed, but it made me feel better about myself. It's an interesting question and one I've not tried to test. Does an AMD64 machine running a 32-bit or 64-bit install run faster or slower with one or the other. For all of my everyday work - Gnome, Firefox, web browsing, email, MythTV, etc., it's been my assumption that there wouldn't be any noticeble difference. for all of the above, the cpu probably isn't going to effect you either way. Network/Hard disk is likely to be the bottleneck for all of them. And I submit that my usage is probably pretty common for most desktop Linux users. The only performance issue might be emerge. MythTV uses an SQL backend and should benefit a little from 64 bit - databases are one of the few places that really benefit from those extra bits, not sure why. Not going to help me. The backend is on a 32-bit SMP machine. I'm frontend only in my office. GIMP also seems to benefit a little, as does encoding pretty much any media (especially video). I'd imagine that inkscape and blender, etc. would also benefit significantly. But these results aren't tested, just mildly observed. Yeah, makes sense. I run 64-bit but assume I'd run at more or less the same speed if I ran 32-bit. I may be wrong. Anyone have any measured data? Same machine, two installs? I never measured anything, but I wouldn't expect to see too much of a difference. If you want to waste your processor's registers, go 32 bit. If you want to jump through hoops to deal with the greater web community (flash, java, etc) go 64 bit. Those are the downsides of each. Yep. I understand the second first hand and probably cannot verify the first. I highly recommend multilib, though I never chroot into a native 32bit environment. You'll want to run a few of your programs 32bit, probably. But the two get together really well. As an end-user, non-developer, home-only Gentoo sys admin I don't even know what multilib is although I see it popping up all the time. Please don't feel the need to write up anything major. Point me at some doc that explains why I'd care and I'll read that. Thanks! Cheers, Mark -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Friday 14 March 2008, Mark Knecht wrote: It's an interesting question and one I've not tried to test. Does an AMD64 machine running a 32-bit or 64-bit install run faster or slower with one or the other. Simple logic dictates that 32 and 64 apps will *generally* run at exactly the same speed, mostly because the amd64 arch is x86 with 64 bit extensions. Unless your app is compiled to actually use the 64 bit features (you'd be surprised just how few are), 32 and 64 bit code tends to run at exactly the same speed using exactly the same opcodes at exactly the same clock rate. For any app not using intensive 64 bit arithmetic (super-duper math/sci stuff and seriously intensive graphics are the only ones I can think of off-hand) it's hard to see a benefit for amd64 with current desktop memory loads. The real benefit of amd64 becomes very obvious when you are dealing with apps that consume huge amounts of memory and 3G of addressable space for all apps just doesn't cut it. This is the problem amd64 was primarily designed to solve. When you have an app that does benefit from amd64 - like Sybase IQ just to pull a random selection from a hat :-) the difference is astounding. Conventional desktops? Never seen a benefit yet on a normal desktop. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mark Knecht wrote: | On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Dan Farrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | | It's an interesting question and one I've not tried to test. Does an | AMD64 machine running a 32-bit or 64-bit install run faster or slower | with one or the other. For all of my everyday work - Gnome, Firefox, | web browsing, email, MythTV, etc., it's been my assumption that there | wouldn't be any noticeble difference. I run 64-bit but assume I'd run | at more or less the same speed if I ran 32-bit. I may be wrong. Anyone | have any measured data? Same machine, two installs? I have a few numbers from genlop -t *32-bit* ~ * www-client/mozilla-firefox ~ Sat Dec 29 00:35:39 2007 www-client/mozilla-firefox-2.0.0.11 ~ merge time: 11 minutes and 30 seconds. ~ Sat Feb 9 12:43:52 2008 www-client/mozilla-firefox-2.0.0.12 ~ merge time: 10 minutes and 44 seconds. ~ * mail-client/mozilla-thunderbird ~ Sat Aug 4 13:25:28 2007 mail-client/mozilla-thunderbird-2.0.0.6 ~ merge time: 18 minutes and 49 seconds. ~ Fri Nov 23 12:57:01 2007 mail-client/mozilla-thunderbird-2.0.0.9 ~ merge time: 10 minutes and 37 seconds. ~ * kde-base/kdelibs ~ Sat Dec 29 09:31:18 2007 kde-base/kdelibs-3.5.7-r3 ~ merge time: 18 minutes and 56 seconds. ~ Sat Dec 29 11:07:40 2007 kde-base/kdelibs-3.5.7-r3 ~ merge time: 19 minutes and 37 seconds. ~ Wed Jan 30 20:38:52 2008 kde-base/kdelibs-3.5.8-r3 ~ merge time: 18 minutes and 19 seconds. ~ Tue Feb 26 20:16:28 2008 kde-base/kdelibs-3.5.8-r3 ~ merge time: 21 minutes and 38 seconds. * app-office/openoffice ~ Fri Nov 23 19:14:12 2007 app-office/openoffice-2.3.0 ~ merge time: 1 hour and 48 seconds. ~ Sat Dec 29 01:35:35 2007 app-office/openoffice-2.3.1 ~ merge time: 59 minutes and 56 seconds. ~ Tue Feb 5 11:51:26 2008 app-office/openoffice-2.3.1-r1 ~ merge time: 1 hour, 4 minutes and 28 seconds. *64-bit* * www-client/mozilla-firefox ~ Tue Jan 1 14:14:50 2008 www-client/mozilla-firefox-2.0.0.11 ~ merge time: 8 minutes and 43 seconds. ~ Wed Feb 20 21:39:03 2008 www-client/mozilla-firefox-2.0.0.12 ~ merge time: 8 minutes and 39 seconds. * mail-client/mozilla-thunderbird ~ Tue Jan 1 14:25:01 2008 mail-client/mozilla-thunderbird-2.0.0.9 ~ merge time: 9 minutes and 9 seconds. ~ Sun Mar 9 01:22:43 2008 mail-client/mozilla-thunderbird-2.0.0.12 ~ merge time: 8 minutes and 2 seconds. * kde-base/kdelibs ~ Tue Jan 1 11:04:37 2008 kde-base/kdelibs-3.5.7-r3 ~ merge time: 16 minutes and 47 seconds. ~ Wed Feb 20 22:01:22 2008 kde-base/kdelibs-3.5.8-r3 ~ merge time: 18 minutes and 12 seconds. * app-office/openoffice ~ Fri Mar 14 21:23:57 2008 app-office/openoffice-2.3.1-r1 ~ merge time: 48 minutes and 45 seconds. These times are from the same machine: abit ip35 pro, c2quad q6600 (2.4ghz), 4gb ram, (320+320) sataII raid0 (155-MB/s) - -- Filipe Sousa -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH2wABbQdNYqwwwCwRAvWsAKCSjwXXHIT2agHd7Hh+7ZwaTOzQeQCdG1Ct M29wU4QkWfsgkRO1jgipuKw= =5cdc -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:45:21 + Filipe Sousa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a few numbers from genlop -t Thanks much! This was interesting for me to read. I am surprised by how much faster 64bit system was for compiling these things. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 3:45 PM, Filipe Sousa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mark Knecht wrote: | On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Dan Farrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | | It's an interesting question and one I've not tried to test. Does an | AMD64 machine running a 32-bit or 64-bit install run faster or slower | with one or the other. For all of my everyday work - Gnome, Firefox, | web browsing, email, MythTV, etc., it's been my assumption that there | wouldn't be any noticeble difference. I run 64-bit but assume I'd run | at more or less the same speed if I ran 32-bit. I may be wrong. Anyone | have any measured data? Same machine, two installs? I have a few numbers from genlop -t SNIP These times are from the same machine: abit ip35 pro, c2quad q6600 (2.4ghz), 4gb ram, (320+320) sataII raid0 (155-MB/s) - -- Filipe Sousa Nice numbers and nice machine. Must have set you back a bit. ;-) It seems when I match up exact revisions you're getting something between a 10-15% speed increase. Quite nice. Do we know that the amount code compiled is identical? I imagine everything you show is correct since the speed increase is pretty consistent from app to app. Great stuff. Thanks. Cheers, Mark -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mark Knecht wrote: | On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 3:45 PM, Filipe Sousa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Nice numbers and nice machine. Must have set you back a bit. ;-) this machine was built by me just for gentoo. | It seems when I match up exact revisions you're getting something | between a 10-15% speed increase. Quite nice. | | Do we know that the amount code compiled is identical? I imagine | everything you show is correct since the speed increase is pretty | consistent from app to app. the numbers may not be 100% accurate because i'm doing other things while compiling but i'm pretty happy with the result. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH2xC4bQdNYqwwwCwRAkrhAJ4vz4wfdiginX2kZey1ryk5Ypz5zwCeN0Ct x5quz7ViyYgRXwaFFo/d66Q= =8vmC -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
* Jamie Dobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I've been away from Gentoo for the last year or so and using Ubuntu but find that I want to return to Gentoo simply because of the level of customization that I can do with it. wb :) However, I do have a few worries - why has there been no 2007.1 release (there was a 2006.1 from what I recall)? Actually, I never cared about these releases. IMHO they're just profiles. portage keeps your system up-to-date by fresh ebuilds. For a fresh installation I always take the newest profile and older systems are migrated from time to time. Never felt the need for an immediate profile update. There also appears to have been a bit of turmoil in the Gentoo 'management;' - has this affected the long term viability of running Gentoo? AFAIK, this only affected the foundation, which is just an organization which does some business work (eg. marketing), collects funds for server infrastructure, etc. The Gentoo project itself doesn't *need* it, it just makes some things easier. I've never felt any impact on the distro by these troubles. (but that's just my personal oppition) Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? Just a few questions before I plunge in to it again :-) My personal taste: only useful if you need more than 3GB per process (1GB virtual address space is reseverd for the kernel, but this could be changed within the kernel sources) or for bumber crunching, maybe also in some database workloads. The key point: on an 64bit system, CPU traffic is 64bit width, so CPU's IO is faster, but this (normally) implies also 64bit code alignment, which can waste a lot of memory. BTW: some applications can use 64bit ops for specific things even on an 32bit base system (but this has to be done with caution, just like any other CPU specific optimizations). cu -- - Enrico Weigelt== metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/ - Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce: http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions: http://patches.metux.de/ - -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 12:59 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Amar Cosic wrote: There should be gentoo-chat list There is one. We call it gentoo-user. It's a rite-of-passage thing. When you figure out the *real* purpose of gentoo-user, then we let you into the inner circle. lol. So long as I don't have to eat the cookie. -- Iain Buchanan iaindb at netspace dot net dot au You can't have everything. Where would you put it? -- Steven Wright -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 04:12 -0500, Dale wrote: I would love to build a rig with two dual core CPUs, 4 cores in all. Compile times would be pretty short. ;-) Woo Ooo. brag I just installed Gentoo on a quad-core dual-cpu Xeon E5420 (2.50GHz). 8Gb RAM, 800Gb raid. It's not mine - I've only convinced the sysadmin to let me play until it needs to be used for something real (what a waste to have those cpu's doing nothing, I thought, so let's install Gentoo :) MAKEOPTS=-j9 ... -- Iain Buchanan iaindb at netspace dot net dot au The trouble with doing something right the first time is that nobody appreciates how difficult it was. -- Walt West -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Hi Iain, on Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 04:53:40PM +0930, you wrote: brag I just installed Gentoo on a quad-core dual-cpu Xeon E5420 (2.50GHz). 8Gb RAM, 800Gb raid. It's not mine - I've only convinced the sysadmin to let me play until it needs to be used for something real (what a waste to have those cpu's doing nothing, I thought, so let's install Gentoo :) FSC made a mistake with their price lists for us these weeks, they seem to have deducted academic institution discount twice---and as they have to give 30 days notice upon raising prices according to their contract with university, they couldn't just correct it right away. Guess who got himself a machine pretty much like that... snicker scnr, Matthias -- I prefer encrypted and signed messages. KeyID: FAC37665 Fingerprint: 8C16 3F0A A6FC DF0D 19B0 8DEF 48D9 1700 FAC3 7665 pgpk88T4GeVHo.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
I've been away from Gentoo for the last year or so and using Ubuntu but find that I want to return to Gentoo simply because of the level of customization that I can do with it. However, I do have a few worries - why has there been no 2007.1 release (there was a 2006.1 from what I recall)? There also appears to have been a bit of turmoil in the Gentoo 'management;' - has this affected the long term viability of running Gentoo? Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? Just a few questions before I plunge in to it again :-) -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Jamie Dobbs wrote: I've been away from Gentoo for the last year or so and using Ubuntu but find that I want to return to Gentoo simply because of the level of customization that I can do with it. However, I do have a few worries - why has there been no 2007.1 release (there was a 2006.1 from what I recall)? There wasn't a 2007.1 release because there was so much changes to so many packages and things just never lined up stability wise so there could be one. That's my understanding of it anyway. It just seems there was always something blocking progress. I have read that 2008 should be out real soon. A couple weeks I think. May want to wait and install from that depending on your situation. http://www.gentoo.org/news/20080123_releng_beta.xml There also appears to have been a bit of turmoil in the Gentoo 'management;' - has this affected the long term viability of running Gentoo? The Foundation had some legal issues for a bit, long bit, which has been discussed on here and the forums at length but is either corrected now or in the process. I think it is corrected now but not 100% sure of that. Gentoo is very much alive and kicking tho. The tree and distro itself is humming right along. I see updates every day to packages so that is no worry. As far as I know, the tree has not slowed down at all. Just needed some lawyers involved on the foundation end. pukes at the idea Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? Just a few questions before I plunge in to it again :-) No clue on this one. I'm not building a 64 bit rig until I know I can use it and it is supported 100%. Since you already got one, may as well. Hope that helps. Dale :-) :-) -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Jamie Dobbs wrote: I've been away from Gentoo for the last year or so and using Ubuntu but find that I want to return to Gentoo simply because of the level of customization that I can do with it. However, I do have a few worries - why has there been no 2007.1 release (there was a 2006.1 from what I recall)? There also appears to have been a bit of turmoil in the Gentoo 'management;' - has this affected the long term viability of running Gentoo? Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? Just a few questions before I plunge in to it again :-) you can find anonther to your question in the mailing list. this is an email chris brennan wrote some days ago: The problem is that we don't believe in tales about witches and premonition, do we? ;) I do, does that count? Some people call it yellow press (though in my country it would be translated to pink press :P. This gets kind of boring, because every two or three days a similar thread arises in the forum or here. Once a year I answer this kind of topic (I usually just silently ignore them). Bad press In general should just about do it. If in doubt, /. it first. If it's been /.'d, dig, if you can dig it. Something is afoot, and we all need to be paying attention :D Right now, gentoo is stronger than ever. Monthly newsletter works again, and they are better than ever. The legal issues with the foundation (about papers and bureaucracy) are all now solved and portage is maintained and updated everyday. I figure how a person that use gentoo can question these things... So I figure if any of the persons who open this kind of threads are really using Gentoo for anything else than installing it to be cooler. Gentoo is like a cult ... it can't easily be killed. Every generation has a mythology. Every millenium has a doomsday cult. Every legend gets the distortion knob wound up until the speaker melts. Archeologists at the University of Helsinki today uncovered what could be the earliest known writings from the Cult of Tux, a fanatical religious sect that flourished during the early Silicon Age, around the dawn of the third millenium AD... Gospel of Tux, Verse I No offense intended. As I said, this just gets boring after 1000 posts telling the same. It kind of seems like spam to me. It's dead, squashed, flattened, ya hear :D (very poor Capone imitation) Saludos :) -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Dale wrote: Jamie Dobbs wrote: Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? Just a few questions before I plunge in to it again :-) No clue on this one. I'm not building a 64 bit rig until I know I can use it and it is supported 100%. Since you already got one, may as well. Hope that helps. Dale :-) :-) only thing I found out until now is that flash is not working. Maybe this is fixed by now. kh -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Hi, On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 4:22 PM, Jamie Dobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been away from Gentoo for the last year or so and using Ubuntu but find that I want to return to Gentoo simply because of the level of customization that I can do with it. However, I do have a few worries - why has there been no 2007.1 release (there was a 2006.1 from what I recall)? There also appears to have been a bit of turmoil in the Gentoo 'management;' - has this affected the long term viability of running Gentoo? Gentoo is doing just fine. Welcome back! Mike -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Hi Jamie, Jamie Dobbs schrieb: Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? Just a few questions before I plunge in to it again :-) you need a 64-bit system only if you have more then 4GB memory on your pc. If not I would suggest to use x86. Bye, Matthias -- Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning. -- Rich Cook -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote: I would love to build a rig with two dual core CPUs, 4 cores in all. Compile times would be pretty short. ;-) Woo Ooo. You and everybody else. Plus tons of ram, 1TB storage and a good graphics subsystem. Yeah! Uwe -- Informal Linux Group Namibia: http://www.linux.org.na/ SysEx (Pty) Ltd.: http://www.SysEx.com.na/ -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Alan McKinnon wrote: On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote: I would love to build a rig with two dual core CPUs, 4 cores in all. Compile times would be pretty short. ;-) Woo Ooo. Huh. Dunno about that. I have a Core2 Duo with 2G RAM here and took kdeenablefinal out of USE last night. Started emerge world at midnight, wanted to remerge 240+ packages, at 7am this morning it was up to #200 or thereabouts. So either these cpus aren't all they are cracked up to be or the software is just HUGE. I'm going with the latter :-) I also see that kde-4.0.2 just hit portage, complete with 345M of sources to be downloaded. The other lads in the office here think I am completely and utterly mentally defective to want to run Gentoo. I think I'm starting to see why they might think that evil_grin My old AMD 2500+ with 1Gb of ram does pretty good. I would just like to be able to type in cat /proc/cpuinfo and see it list those CPUs. LOL I agree, the software is just huge. It just seems to keep creeping up on us. Compile times just keep going up too. +++ [EMAIL PROTECTED] / # emerge -ep world | genlop -p These are the pretended packages: (this may take a while; wait...) SNIP one lng list Estimated update time: 1 day, 20 hours, 53 minutes. [EMAIL PROTECTED] / # +++ That used to be about 23 hours or so. More bells and whistles tho. o_O I'm sticking with KDE 3 right now. With this dial-up and the frequency of updates, it's just not worth it right now. By the time I get it updated a new set of updates is coming out. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote: I would love to build a rig with two dual core CPUs, 4 cores in all. Compile times would be pretty short. ;-) Woo Ooo. Huh. Dunno about that. I have a Core2 Duo with 2G RAM here and took kdeenablefinal out of USE last night. Started emerge world at midnight, wanted to remerge 240+ packages, at 7am this morning it was up to #200 or thereabouts. So either these cpus aren't all they are cracked up to be or the software is just HUGE. I'm going with the latter :-) I also see that kde-4.0.2 just hit portage, complete with 345M of sources to be downloaded. The other lads in the office here think I am completely and utterly mentally defective to want to run Gentoo. I think I'm starting to see why they might think that evil_grin -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote: P. S. Is this coming through as plain text? Yes. They all do that, sir :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote: Alan McKinnon wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / # emerge -ep world | genlop -p These are the pretended packages: (this may take a while; wait...) SNIP one lng list Estimated update time: 1 day, 20 hours, 53 minutes. [EMAIL PROTECTED] / # Hmmm. Mine's about the same :-) Estimated update time: 1 day, 16 hours, 10 minutes. On my previous notebook, that was 11 hours! -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:39:39 +0100, KH wrote: only thing I found out until now is that flash is not working. Maybe this is fixed by now. Install nspluginwrapper and the vast majority of flash sites work. Progress is being made then. The last I heard the vast majority of software worked so maybe by the time I can build a rig it will be 100% working. is my issue right now. I would love to build a rig with two dual core CPUs, 4 cores in all. Compile times would be pretty short. ;-) Woo Ooo. Dale :-) :-) :-) -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Am Dienstag, 11. März 2008 schrieb ext Alan McKinnon: On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote: I would love to build a rig with two dual core CPUs, 4 cores in all. Compile times would be pretty short. ;-) Woo Ooo. Huh. Dunno about that. I have a Core2 Duo with 2G RAM here and took kdeenablefinal out of USE last night. Started emerge world at midnight, wanted to remerge 240+ packages, at 7am this morning it was up to #200 or thereabouts. KDE 3 is known for its long build times. Thanks to the new build system, KDE 4 builds orders of magnitude faster (kdelibs 4 build takes way less than an hour on my Core 2 Duo laptop, while kdelibs 3 takes more than 3 hours). Bye... Dirk -- Dirk Heinrichs | Tel: +49 (0)162 234 3408 Configuration Manager | Fax: +49 (0)211 47068 111 Capgemini Deutschland | Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wanheimerstraße 68 | Web: http://www.capgemini.com D-40468 Düsseldorf | ICQ#: 110037733 GPG Public Key C2E467BB | Keyserver: www.keyserver.net signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote: I would love to build a rig with two dual core CPUs, 4 cores in all. Compile times would be pretty short. ;-) Woo Ooo. You and everybody else. Plus tons of ram, 1TB storage and a good graphics subsystem. Yeah! Uwe -- Informal Linux Group Namibia: http://www.linux.org.na/ SysEx (Pty) Ltd.: http://www.SysEx.com.na/ -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list Make it 2 TB - 1 TB is not enough. But what a machine to compile OO.o with... not bad, ehh? *drooling* -kristian poul herkild -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Robert Stockdale IV wrote: On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 5:29 AM, Kristian Poul Herkild [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote: I would love to build a rig with two dual core CPUs, 4 cores in all. Compile times would be pretty short. ;-) Woo Ooo. You and everybody else. Plus tons of ram, 1TB storage and a good graphics subsystem. Yeah! Uwe -- Informal Linux Group Namibia: http://www.linux.org.na/ SysEx (Pty) Ltd.: http://www.SysEx.com.na/ -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list Make it 2 TB - 1 TB is not enough. But what a machine to compile OO.o with... not bad, ehh? *drooling* -kristian poul herkild -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list Why not 2 Quad core Phenom processors that would make it 8 cores. Bob Do they make them with dual AMD sockets? Do they make them with quad AMD sockets? I know they did at one time but not sure any more. I'm a AMD person. Nothing against Intel, just like AMD is all. Since I am on a stinking dial-up still, drive space is not a issue for me. :'( I do have a old Compaq Presario with quad CPUs and a whooping 128MBs of ram tho. I used to run folding on it. It's a table right now. Big enough table too. LOL Dale :-) :-) :-) P. S. Is this coming through as plain text? -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Uwe Thiem wrote: BTW, you can reduce the downloads by a large margin using deltup. Uwe Dial-up user reporting in here. What is this feature you speak of here? How does this work? Dale :-) :-) -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 5:29 AM, Kristian Poul Herkild [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote: I would love to build a rig with two dual core CPUs, 4 cores in all. Compile times would be pretty short. ;-) Woo Ooo. You and everybody else. Plus tons of ram, 1TB storage and a good graphics subsystem. Yeah! Uwe -- Informal Linux Group Namibia: http://www.linux.org.na/ SysEx (Pty) Ltd.: http://www.SysEx.com.na/ -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list Make it 2 TB - 1 TB is not enough. But what a machine to compile OO.o with... not bad, ehh? *drooling* -kristian poul herkild -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list Why not 2 Quad core Phenom processors that would make it 8 cores. Bob
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:39:39 +0100, KH wrote: only thing I found out until now is that flash is not working. Maybe this is fixed by now. Install nspluginwrapper and the vast majority of flash sites work. -- Neil Bothwick Actually, Microsoft is sort of a mixture between the Borg and the Ferengi. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Alan McKinnon wrote: I also see that kde-4.0.2 just hit portage, complete with 345M of sources to be downloaded. It's compiling here right now. On two boxes using distcc. BTW, you can reduce the downloads by a large margin using deltup. The other lads in the office here think I am completely and utterly mentally defective to want to run Gentoo. I think I'm starting to see why they might think that evil_grin The gentoo community is slowly growing here in Namibia - since the introduction of ADSL. ;-) Uwe -- Informal Linux Group Namibia: http://www.linux.org.na/ SysEx (Pty) Ltd.: http://www.SysEx.com.na/ -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Alan McKinnon wrote: On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote: P. S. Is this coming through as plain text? Yes. They all do that, sir :-) Thanks. Any time they don't, let me know. Here or any other list. I'll get my hammer if needed. :-@ Dale :-) :-) -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:29:59 +0100 (CET), Kristian Poul Herkild wrote: Make it 2 TB - 1 TB is not enough. But what a machine to compile OO.o with... not bad, ehh? *drooling* Forget compiling OOo, that machine would be fast enough to run it ;-) -- Neil Bothwick In space, no one can hear you fart. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
There should be gentoo-chat list -- Amar Ćosić [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] +38761240095 http://www.amar.co.ba
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dirk Heinrichs wrote: KDE 3 is known for its long build times. Thanks to the new build system, KDE 4 builds orders of magnitude faster (kdelibs 4 build takes way less than an hour on my Core 2 Duo laptop, while kdelibs 3 takes more than 3 hours). Oh, oh, oh. 1 hour vs. 3 hours isn't orders of magnitude. Even in binary, it would only be 1 oder of magnitude. ;-) Otherwise, I agree, cmake is much faster than autotools. Uwe -- Informal Linux Group Namibia: http://www.linux.org.na/ SysEx (Pty) Ltd.: http://www.SysEx.com.na/ -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:29:59 +0100 (CET), Kristian Poul Herkild wrote: Make it 2 TB - 1 TB is not enough. But what a machine to compile OO.o with... not bad, ehh? *drooling* Forget compiling OOo, that machine would be fast enough to run it ;-) Indead, forget about compile time of OOo. It will use only one core. :-( Uwe -- Informal Linux Group Namibia: http://www.linux.org.na/ SysEx (Pty) Ltd.: http://www.SysEx.com.na/ -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Amar Cosic wrote: There should be gentoo-chat list There is one. We call it gentoo-user. It's a rite-of-passage thing. When you figure out the *real* purpose of gentoo-user, then we let you into the inner circle. Next week's lesson is to figure out the *real* mailing list where you can get valuable support for user apps. See you next week. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote:
Uwe Thiem wrote:
BTW, you can reduce the downloads by a large margin using deltup.
Uwe
Dial-up user reporting in here. What is this feature you speak
of here? How does this work?
Instead of downloading the whole tarball of a new version of a
package, it downloads a delta between the latest old version and the
new version (kind of diff). It then produces the new tarball locally
from the old one and the delta.
Simply emerge deltup and add the following line to
your /etc/make.conf:
FETCHCOMMAND=/usr/bin/getdelta.sh \${URI}
It can reduce your downloads by up to 95% depending on how much the
new tarballs differs from the old one.
And now the downside:
1.
It doesn't help you when you emerge a new package for the first time.
2.
At times, it simply doesn't work. It will then fall back to
downloading the whole tarball.
Give it a try. If it doesn't suit you, you can simple delete the line
above from make.conf.
Uwe
--
Informal Linux Group Namibia:
http://www.linux.org.na/
SysEx (Pty) Ltd.:
http://www.SysEx.com.na/
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008 07:22:38 Jamie Dobbs wrote: I do have a few worries - why has there been no 2007.1 release (there was a 2006.1 from what I recall)? Gentoo does not have versions. What you're quoting is the version of the installation CD, which doesn't have to keep up with the installed system. Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? Why are you telling us what you're not running? It's hard to answer your question in this form. -- Rgds Peter -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Am Dienstag, 11. März 2008 schrieb ext Uwe Thiem: On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dirk Heinrichs wrote: KDE 3 is known for its long build times. Thanks to the new build system, KDE 4 builds orders of magnitude faster (kdelibs 4 build takes way less than an hour on my Core 2 Duo laptop, while kdelibs 3 takes more than 3 hours). Oh, oh, oh. 1 hour vs. 3 hours isn't orders of magnitude. That's kdelibs only. The savings sum up to a difference of several hours for all of KDE (if I remember right, KDE 4 was built in 4-5 hours last time). Bye... Dirk -- Dirk Heinrichs | Tel: +49 (0)162 234 3408 Configuration Manager | Fax: +49 (0)211 47068 111 Capgemini Deutschland | Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wanheimerstraße 68 | Web: http://www.capgemini.com D-40468 Düsseldorf | ICQ#: 110037733 GPG Public Key C2E467BB | Keyserver: www.keyserver.net signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:39:39 +0100, KH wrote: only thing I found out until now is that flash is not working. Maybe this is fixed by now. Install nspluginwrapper and the vast majority of flash sites work. cool. Never missed it but it's nice to have it. Thanx -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:22 AM, Jamie Dobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been away from Gentoo for the last year or so and using Ubuntu but find that I want to return to Gentoo simply because of the level of customization that I can do with it. Well then, welcome back. SNIP Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? I run an amd64 as my desktop system. It' started as my 3rd machine so at the time it was 64-bit for fun. today I just live with it. There are some limitations on the 64-bit platform with web-based media, but beyond that I find 32 and 64-bit machines to be pretty similar in performance. I run old windows games under Wine on 64-bit and they work OK. I think Flash and Java have been the two larger issues for me over time. A few win32codec issues also. However if I wanted to get around those I could probably do something in a chroot but I'm not that motivated. If I was building a desktop machine today I wouldn't build 64-bit. I see no advantage and a few disadvantages, but either way you go you'll probably be fine. Cheers, Mark -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008 11:02:16 Dale wrote: [...] I'm sticking with KDE 3 right now. With this dial-up and the frequency of updates, it's just not worth it right now. By the time I get it updated a new set of updates is coming out. Guess I'm nuts since I run kde-svn... ;) -- Naga -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Dienstag, 11. März 2008, Jamie Dobbs wrote: However, I do have a few worries - why has there been no 2007.1 release (there was a 2006.1 from what I recall)? security problems popping up always at the wrong time made it almost impossible. So they scrapped it and concentrated on doing the usual stuff. Writing ebuilds, fixing bugs. Since install cds aren't very important, nothing was lost besides some news on distrowatch. There also appears to have been a bit of turmoil in the Gentoo 'management;' - has this affected the long term viability of running Gentoo? no. Also I'm not running at Athlon X2 system, ifs there any _real_ advantage to running AMD64 or should I still to x86? Just a few questions before I plunge in to it again :-) yes. More registers. More memory. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Naga wrote: On Tuesday 11 March 2008 11:02:16 Dale wrote: [...] I'm sticking with KDE 3 right now. With this dial-up and the frequency of updates, it's just not worth it right now. By the time I get it updated a new set of updates is coming out. Guess I'm nuts since I run kde-svn... ;) wellwhaddayaknow. There's at least one person in the world more nuts than me: kde-4.0.2 e17-cvs :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
Alan McKinnon wrote: wellwhaddayaknow. There's at least one person in the world more nuts than me: kde-4.0.2 e17-cvs :-) Make that two. o_O Dale :-) :-) -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
--- Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:39:39 +0100, KH wrote: only thing I found out until now is that flash is not working. Maybe this is fixed by now. Install nspluginwrapper and the vast majority of flash sites work. Yep, running AMD64 at home. For the most part, no problems. I've got nspluginwrapper installed - and it was working at one point, but doesn't seem to be any longer (not sure why). I did notice that Firefox had problems with having tv.yahoo.com up AND another flash site (youtube, google video, etc.) in different tabs or windows running through the same instance; seems to work okay if you use profiles to run multiple instances. The only other issue I've run into is having a good port of Java for the 64-bit environment - Sun's JDK builds to the 32-bit right now; would be nice for it to support 64-bit too. Overall, with my 1 GB RAM, AMD Athon AMD64 3200+ I really like running it in the 64-bit mode. Things work pretty well, and I have no complaints whatsoever - of course, it probably helps I have other non-64-bit systems to mitigate any issues, like the Flash issue. Ben -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dale wrote: Alan McKinnon wrote: wellwhaddayaknow. There's at least one person in the world more nuts than me: kde-4.0.2 e17-cvs :-) Make that two. o_O Bugger. Here's me thinking I was unique in the world. I reckon that fellow who was hinting earlier that this thread should move to a -chat list is probably pulling his hair out by now harharhar :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Status of Gentoo
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 22:08:59 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Bugger. Here's me thinking I was unique in the world. You are, just like everyone else :) -- Neil Bothwick Did you hear about the blind prostitute? You have to hand it to her. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
