PAE, i686 vs. x86_64 (was: Recommendations)
> 32-bit apps run fine in a 64-bit Linux OS, and in many cases better > since the OS can manage memory a bit more efficiently. The downside > is that you need to install the required 32-bit libraries too. > So far, I have not seen a 32-bit application that could not run on > a 64-bit Linux OS. They are still running native, but they think > they are running in a 32-bit OS even though the drivers themselves > may be 64-bit drivers. Right. We were in the midst of (what we thought was) an orderly transition from a rather dated i686 distro to a more current i686 distro targetted at the same hardware and didn't realize until late in the game that support for 4Gb user space had gone away. We had to scramble to instead migrate to an x86_64 distro, obliging some of our customers to upgrade their hardware earlier than anticipated. Since even just porting the apps/libs forward to the newer GCC tools was already proving painful we chose not to convert them to 64bit entities and, as you say, native kernel support for 32bit entities in the x86_64 kernels has proven to be solid. It was quite the adventure, though, and there was wailing and gnashing of teeth as we had expected the new distro to be (more or less) a drop-in replacement for the old one... ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Recommendations...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 10:28:01 -0400, Jerry Feldman wrote: > On 06/16/2010 09:20 AM, Michael ODonnell wrote: >> Well, when you've got an installed base of venerable yet cantankerous >> 32bit apps that are tuned for that 4Gb virtual space and need to >> interoperate with a bunch of 3rd party apps and libs and drivers that are >> also 32bit and it would be a bitch to port them to 64bit and requalify >> them all over again and oh yeah they're running on 32bit machines that >> have plenty of life in them and all you wanted was to get the benefits >> of running a newer kernel but now that feature you were using has been >> discontinued that's one scenario. Guess how I know. > 32-bit apps run fine in a 64-bit Linux OS, and in many cases better > since the OS can manage memory a bit more efficiently. The downside is > that you need to install the required 32-bit libraries too. So far, I > have not seen a 32-bit application that could not run on a 64-bit Linux > OS. They are still running native, but they think they are running in a > 32-bit OS eventhough the drivers themselves may be 64-bit drivers. > > Yes good old -m32 :-) -- Thanks, Joseph Smith Set-Top-Linux www.settoplinux.org ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Recommendations...
On 06/16/2010 09:20 AM, Michael ODonnell wrote: > Well, when you've got an installed base of venerable yet cantankerous > 32bit apps that are tuned for that 4Gb virtual space and need to > interoperate with a bunch of 3rd party apps and libs and drivers that are > also 32bit and it would be a bitch to port them to 64bit and requalify > them all over again and oh yeah they're running on 32bit machines that > have plenty of life in them and all you wanted was to get the benefits > of running a newer kernel but now that feature you were using has been > discontinued that's one scenario. Guess how I know. 32-bit apps run fine in a 64-bit Linux OS, and in many cases better since the OS can manage memory a bit more efficiently. The downside is that you need to install the required 32-bit libraries too. So far, I have not seen a 32-bit application that could not run on a 64-bit Linux OS. They are still running native, but they think they are running in a 32-bit OS eventhough the drivers themselves may be 64-bit drivers. -- Jerry Feldman Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id: 537C5846 PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Recommendations...
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Michael ODonnell wrote: >> Processes can potentially indirectly access more than 4 GiB of RAM >> by using memory windowing/bank swapping/etc. This would be similar >> to "Expanded Memory" from the days of the 8086. Reserve some >> range of process-addressable memory. A special library/system >> call exchanges that block of memory with another block from the >> not-directly-addressable RAM. > > (cringe!) I hope you're not speaking from recent experience. Says the guy who's stuck with a 32-bit system but still wants to use large memories. ;-) But seriously: Microsoft Windows Server used this technique back before Microsoft had their 64-bit stuff working well. They called it "Address Windowing Extensions". I am told MS-SQL could make good use of it on Win Server 2003, which was 32-bit only, but did fully support PAE. I don't know if Linux even supports this kind of thing; the kernel people's solution may just be "you should use a 64-bit kernel". > Well, when you've got an installed base of venerable yet cantankerous > 32bit apps [...] but now that feature you were using has been > discontinued that's one scenario. Guess how I know. >-/ Ick. You have my sympathies. I hate legacy stuff. (Too bad there's always a lot of it.) And it's amazing how many programmers *still* assume a pointer is always 32 bits wide. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Recommendations...
I haven't gotten wireless to work yet but I haven't spent time on it beyond trying the default Ubuntu stuff. >If you have a Broadcom chip, just install /b43/-/fwcutter/ from the >Ubuntu repos. During installation it pops up a dialog whether you want >to download the firmware or not. Just click yes, and your wireless will >come right up. Most Intel wireless chips work out of the box. Or try System/Administration/Hardware Drivers. Install the wireless drivers that way, and re-boot. I install wicd-gtk and wicd before I start, but that's because I also use fluxbox in addition to gnome. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Recommendations...
> Processes can potentially indirectly access more than 4 GiB of RAM > by using memory windowing/bank swapping/etc. This would be similar > to "Expanded Memory" from the days of the 8086. Reserve some > range of process-addressable memory. A special library/system > call exchanges that block of memory with another block from the > not-directly-addressable RAM. (cringe!) I hope you're not speaking from recent experience. I'll give you a dollar if you can show me such a system. ;-> Actually, that'd be a bargain price entrance-fee to view such a museum piece! >> IIRC, PAE is not necessary until you want to address *more* than >> 4Gb of RAM, though I have a nagging, fragmentary memory that some >> other issue (maybe related to PCI mappings or other I/O stuff?) >> can make PAE advisable even when you don't have more than 4Gb. > [...] > The physical address space is used for any memory-mapped hardware. > That includes RAM, but can also include PCI configuration space, > option ROMs, video RAM, AGP aperture, etc. All of the latter eat > up physical address space. Duh, yes - that's what I was thinking of. >> There used to be a config option that made a full 4GB of virtual >> address space available to every process by forcing the kernel to use >> its own page tables; support for this capability has been deprecated, >> apparently based on the attitude that anybody who wants more than >> 3Gb virtual address space should be running a 64bit OS, a rather >> condescending stance IMO. > > It may be condescending, but it also strikes me as realistic, > especially given all the gyrations the kernel must have to go > through to support it. Why *would* you want to run a 32-bit kernel > if you're trying to do large memory stuff? Well, when you've got an installed base of venerable yet cantankerous 32bit apps that are tuned for that 4Gb virtual space and need to interoperate with a bunch of 3rd party apps and libs and drivers that are also 32bit and it would be a bitch to port them to 64bit and requalify them all over again and oh yeah they're running on 32bit machines that have plenty of life in them and all you wanted was to get the benefits of running a newer kernel but now that feature you were using has been discontinued that's one scenario. Guess how I know. >-/ ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Recommendations...
On 06/16/2010 09:11 AM, Tom Buskey wrote: > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Gerry Hull wrote: > >> This is why I LOVE this list -- lots of great feedback. >> I'll go w/64-bit (trying it w/the live-CD first), and probably Virtualbox. >> BTW, I bought the X61 for $250, in mint condition, from Craigslist. Pretty >> good deal for a decent dual-core box. >> Thanks! >> Gerry >> > I've been running 64 bit Linux for awhile. I had issues installing > 32bit (Fedora 10) on my desktop but 64 bits works perfectly. > > As a user, I don't see the issues about plugins, etc. Of course, I block > flash. > > I got a cheap Lenovo at Christmas and run Ubuntu 9.10 right now. > Suspend works perfectly. I haven't gotten wireless to work yet but I > haven't spent time on it beyond trying the default Ubuntu stuff. > Everything else is perfect. > If you have a Broadcom chip, just install /b43/-/fwcutter/ from the Ubuntu repos. During installation it pops up a dialog whether you want to download the firmware or not. Just click yes, and your wireless will come right up. Most Intel wireless chips work out of the box. -- Jerry Feldman Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id: 537C5846 PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Recommendations...
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Gerry Hull wrote: > This is why I LOVE this list -- lots of great feedback. > I'll go w/64-bit (trying it w/the live-CD first), and probably Virtualbox. > BTW, I bought the X61 for $250, in mint condition, from Craigslist. Pretty > good deal for a decent dual-core box. > Thanks! > Gerry I've been running 64 bit Linux for awhile. I had issues installing 32bit (Fedora 10) on my desktop but 64 bits works perfectly. As a user, I don't see the issues about plugins, etc. Of course, I block flash. I got a cheap Lenovo at Christmas and run Ubuntu 9.10 right now. Suspend works perfectly. I haven't gotten wireless to work yet but I haven't spent time on it beyond trying the default Ubuntu stuff. Everything else is perfect. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: sourceforge what is going there?
Jeffry Smith writes: > > One option would be to try FF with user-agent-switcher. I've logged > into many sites with FF that claim to require IE, but when I use UAS > to set FF to claim to be IE, they work fine. My favourite suggestion, which I saw somewhere a few weeks ago, is to try setting your User-Agent string to "Googlebot" -- "Don't be afraid to ask (λf.((λx.xx) (λr.f(rr." ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Broadcom WiFi -- for a public library -- in Fedora 13 maybe? [now OT]
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Benjamin Scott wrote: > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Dan Jenkins wrote: >> We don't have to wear spandex, do we?? >> I, for one, definitely do not look good in spandex. >> But a cape might be cool. > > No capes! Thunderhead, Stratogale, the list goes on... > Yeah, but Thunderhead ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Web browsers, plugins, stability, processes (was: Recommendations...)
Benjamin Scott writes: > Firefox 3.6.4, currently in the late stages of beta, implements > out-of-process plugins (OOPP). So when Flash explodes, locks up, goes > into an endless loop, etc., you can just kill off that one process, > and the browser is left intact. I've been running it since it was in > the "nightly build" stage, for this feature alone. It seems quite > stable at this point -- prolly even more so than 3.6.3, precisely > because of OOPP. Recommended. Unfortunately the vmware-server administration web-console does not interact with FF3.6 :-( -derek -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH warl...@mit.eduPGP key available ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: sourceforge what is going there?
>should be dismembered. Well, before you dismember them, have you actually ever written to them and told them? http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/sourceforge/wiki/Contact%20us I have written to Sourceforge twice, once to ask about site statistics (i.e. number of projects, number of developers) that had mysteriously disappeared from the site, and once to ask about some categories that had disappeared (scientific/engineering). Both times I received a courteous reply that stated they were re-arranging the site and these things would re-appear soon (which they did). >Whoever thought anybody would enjoy reading teeny-tiny aqua blue type Google? (http://www.google.com/) Not quite "aqua blue" md ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
