Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Joshua Judson Rosen]

Ben Scott  writes:
>
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Joshua Judson Rosen
>  wrote:
> > You think you're joking, but it worked for ATM:
> >
> >    
> 
>   ATM didn't work for ATM.

I do note that it's the only non-joke example listed in Wikipedia's
`Argument to moderation' article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_compromise

-- 
"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: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Michael ODonnell]

> I have seen that in 64-bit Linux, 32-bit processes tend to execute
> a bit faster.  I've seen a number of cases where 32-bit apps run
> faster than their 64-bit version, but I've also seen 64-bit apps
> run faster than their 32-bit versions.  

The 1g/3g memory split I mentioned allowed the kernel to "share"
the page tables with every process rather than using a dedicated
supervisor page table, obviating the page table switch (and the
associated TLB flushes, etc) that would otherwise be incurred
with every crossing of the User/Kernel boundary.  Since the x86_64
kernels do use a dedicated supervisor page table I have to assume
that some syscall-intensive 32bit apps do run a bit slower than
they would on an "equivalent" (whatever that means) x86 kernel.

___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Joshua Judson Rosen
 wrote:
> You think you're joking, but it worked for ATM:
>
>    

  ATM didn't work for ATM.

-- Ben

___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Jerry Feldman]

On 04/05/2012 02:39 PM, Michael ODonnell wrote:
>> In the meantime...  is there any possible downside of having
>> a 64-bit kernel in a 32-bit userspace?  Everything -- drivers,
>> camera, apps -- seems just ducky.
> I've seen instances where 32bit apps and libraries disagreed
> with some 64bit drivers about the layout of the data structures
> that get passed back and forth (earlier versions of the FireWire
> driver versus libraw1394 come to mind) but in general, stuff
> should Just Work.  The 32bit binaries execute natively (ie.
> no emulation or translation overhead) and I think by now most
> kernel code has been taught to do the right thing when it
> sees that the current process is a 32bit binary.  One upside
> is that the 32bit processes are able to address an extra Gb
> of memory since the kernel no longer claims the top 1/4 of
> their address space...
I have seen that in 64-bit Linux, 32-bit processes tend to execute a bit
faster. I've seen a number of cases where 32-bit apps run faster than
their 64-bit version, but I've also seen 64-bit apps run faster than
their 32-bit versions. In any case Linux has been 64-bit since 1995 when
it was ported to the Digital Alpha chip, and Linux ported very easily to
the AMD 64 architecture when it came out. For the most part I have seen
no reason for running a 32-bit OS on a 64-bit chip. Just having the
extra 4 registers and linear memory give that extra speed advantage.
And, as you mention, 32-bit apps do run natively.  The disadvantage is
that you need both 64-bit and 32-bit libraries.

-- 
Jerry Feldman 
Boston Linux and Unix
PGP key id:3BC1EB90 
PGP Key fingerprint: 49E2 C52A FC5A A31F 8D66  C0AF 7CEA 30FC 3BC1 EB90




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Joshua Judson Rosen]

"Ken D'Ambrosio"  writes:
>
> On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 12:40:35 -0400 Joshua Judson Rosen 
> wrote
> 
> > Have you considered upgrading to Debian 6.0/Squeeze? It really sounds
> > more like what you want...:
> > 
> > http://www.debian.org/News/2011/20110205a
> > 
> > I use the same Compiz/GNOME setup as you're describing. I don't use btrfs,
> > but it looks like it went into this release.
> 
> Huh.  I actually *did* consider Debian, but when I checked the site,
> it seemed it was incredibly old kernels with Gnome 2.x, or newer
> kernels with Gnome 3.x.  If there's a btrfs/Gnome 2.x intersection
> in Squeeze, I just might be willing to give it a try.

If it turns out that you do for-some-reason need a newer line of kernels
than the one that shipped as part of the Squeeze release, there's also
the `backports' section--which Debian uses to make newer versions
of packages available for stable releases while still allowing the
releases to remain as `stable = unchanging' to whatever extent
people need that; e.g.:

http://packages.debian.org/squeeze-backports/linux-image-amd64

... as opposed to:

http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/linux-image-amd64

> How long is it due to be supported?

Security updates are provided until 1 year after the *next* release:

http://www.debian.org/security/faq#lifespan

Going by the patterns in Debian's release-history, and what they said
they were going to aim for after Squeeze was release, you've probably got
2 years from ~now (until early 2014) before Squeeze's security udpates
stop.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian#Release_history

http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090729


Of course I have to point out: if you join in and help prepare for
Wheezy's release, you could make Squeeze's EOL come sooner ;)

-- 
"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: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Michael ODonnell]

> In the meantime...  is there any possible downside of having
> a 64-bit kernel in a 32-bit userspace?  Everything -- drivers,
> camera, apps -- seems just ducky.

I've seen instances where 32bit apps and libraries disagreed
with some 64bit drivers about the layout of the data structures
that get passed back and forth (earlier versions of the FireWire
driver versus libraw1394 come to mind) but in general, stuff
should Just Work.  The 32bit binaries execute natively (ie.
no emulation or translation overhead) and I think by now most
kernel code has been taught to do the right thing when it
sees that the current process is a 32bit binary.  One upside
is that the 32bit processes are able to address an extra Gb
of memory since the kernel no longer claims the top 1/4 of
their address space...

___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Shawn O'Shea]

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Michael ODonnell <
michael.odonn...@comcast.net> wrote:

>
>  The most recent announcement from them that I'm
> aware of is that they (once again) plan to abandon the 64bit
> version altogether.


They're actually only providing limited security fix releases of Flash
Player plugin from now on (current 11.2 release on) [1] [2].

Adobe partnered with Google to use a OS/browser independent API for
plugins, but Mozilla specifically stated they will not be implementing this
Google API [3]. So you're good if running Chrome on Linux, but other
browsers remain to be seen, I think.

-Shawn

[1] ZDnet article where I originally saw this -
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/adobe-abandons-linux/10418
[2] Official Adobe info on this -
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplatform/whitepapers/roadmap.html
[3] Mozilla's statements on Pepper/PPAPI -
http://www.internetnews.com/blog/skerner/mozilla-doesnt-want-pepper-for-linux-flash.html
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[michael miller]

The '60s vintage CDC machines like the 3600 & 6500 used 48 bit OSs. 

Mike Miller


 Thu, 2012-04-05 at 12:25 -0400, Joshua Judson Rosen wrote:
> "Brian St. Pierre"  writes:
> >
> > On 04/05/2012 09:20 AM, Ken D'Ambrosio wrote:
> > > But... i386 seems to be missing as a possible architecture.  The closest I
> > > could find was x86.  But this concerned me, because x86_64's bzImage is a 
> > > soft
> > > link to x86's.  Anyway, "What the hell," I thought, and compiled it.  
> > > Installed
> > > it.  Booted it.  And it works great!  Until I went to install Chrome.  
> > > Chrome
> > > said, "You're running a 64-bit OS; here's your 64-bit version."  I tried
> > > installing that, and no soup.  32-bit version installed fine.  So then I
> > > glanced at "uname -a":
> > 
> > Split the difference and call yourself 48-bit? ;)
> 
> You think you're joking, but it worked for ATM:
> 
> 
> 
> ATM broke up all packets, data, and voice streams into 48-byte
> chunks, adding a 5-byte routing header to each one so that they
> could be reassembled later. [...] parties from the United States
> wanted a 64-byte payload because this was felt to be a good
> compromise in larger payloads optimized for data transmission and
> shorter payloads optimized for real-time applications like voice;
> parties from Europe wanted 32-byte payloads because the small size
> (and therefore short transmission times) simplify voice
> applications with respect to echo cancellation. [...] 48 bytes
> (plus 5 header bytes = 53) was chosen as a compromise between the
> two sides. 5-byte headers were chosen because it was thought that
> 10% of the payload was the maximum price to pay for routing
> information.
> 

___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Michael ODonnell]

> but they've heavily favored the 32bit version and seem either
> unable or unwilling to produce and support a stable 64bit plugin.

I meant to say "...to *consistently* produce..."

In fairness, the 64bit Flash plugin I have running with Firefox
right now has actually been quite stable, especially compared
with some of the preceding 64bit versions, or with the 32bit
versions when executed via the "helper" process, which is (I
think) different from Firefox's separate plugin-container process.

___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Ken D'Ambrosio]

On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 13:01:02 -0400 "Michael ODonnell" 
> >Well... here's my /usr/src/linux/arch directory:
> [...]
> >avr32 frvKconfig  mipspowerpc   sparc  x86
> 
> 
> Wooops!  dainbramage...  I meant to say that my arch command
> reports i686 but (as you've indicated) that's not one of
> the options.  This is what works for me:
> 
>ARCH=x86 make V=1

Now why didn't *I* think of that?  ;-)

In the meantime... is there any possible downside of having a 64-bit kernel in
a 32-bit userspace?  Everything -- drivers, camera, apps -- seems just ducky.

Thanks!

-Ken





___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Michael ODonnell]

> What does 32bit do that 64 won't?  Besides browser plugins,
> though that's gotten beter too.

Lack of 64bit browser plugins (particularly Flash) is a big deal
for some.  Adobe's official stance on the matter has been all
over the map (I don't know whether their problem is technical
or political) but they've heavily favored the 32bit version and
seem either unable or unwilling to produce and support a stable
64bit plugin.  The most recent announcement from them that I'm
aware of is that they (once again) plan to abandon the 64bit
version altogether.  It's possible to run the 32bit plugin using
some kind of "helper" process but the last time I tried that
(admittedly some time ago) it was too unstable to bother with.
 
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Ken D'Ambrosio]

On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 12:40:35 -0400 Joshua Judson Rosen 
wrote

> Have you considered upgrading to Debian 6.0/Squeeze? It really sounds
> more like what you want...:
> 
> http://www.debian.org/News/2011/20110205a
> 
> I use the same Compiz/GNOME setup as you're describing. I don't use btrfs,
> but it looks like it went into this release.

Huh.  I actually *did* consider Debian, but when I checked the site, it seemed
it was incredibly old kernels with Gnome 2.x, or newer kernels with Gnome 3.x. 
If there's a btrfs/Gnome 2.x intersection in Squeeze, I just might be willing
to give it a try.  How long is it due to be supported?

Thanks!

-Ken





___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Michael ODonnell]

>On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 10:29:23 -0400 "Michael ODonnell"
> wrote
>
>> BTW, for recent kernel sources I think the value you wanted to
>> use for ARCH is i686 rather than i386, even though the latter
>> may be what the "arch" command reports.
>
>Well... here's my /usr/src/linux/arch directory:
[...]
>avr32 frvKconfig  mipspowerpc   sparc  x86


Wooops!  dainbramage...  I meant to say that my arch command
reports i686 but (as you've indicated) that's not one of
the options.  This is what works for me:

   ARCH=x86 make V=1
 
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Joshua Judson Rosen]

"Ken D'Ambrosio"  writes:
>
> Brian: I'm gonna pull the whole repo.  I really like btrfs, and anything
> pre-10.10 isn't recent enough to support it for an installation.  And I ain't
> doing 12.04 because, well, it ain't the epitome of the Linux user experience.
> ;-)

Ken,

Have you considered upgrading to Debian 6.0/Squeeze? It really sounds
more like what you want...:

http://www.debian.org/News/2011/20110205a

I use the same Compiz/GNOME setup as you're describing. I don't use btrfs,
but it looks like it went into this release.

-- 
"Don't be afraid to ask (λf.((λx.xx) (λr.f(rr."


> On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 10:29:23 -0400 "Michael ODonnell"
>  wrote
> 
> > BTW, for recent kernel sources I think the value you wanted to
> > use for ARCH is i686 rather than i386, even though the latter
> > may be what the "arch" command reports.
> 
> Well... here's my /usr/src/linux/arch directory:
> 
> alpha c6xhexagon  m68kopenrisc  score  um xtensa
> arm   cris   ia64 microblaze  pariscsh unicore32
> avr32 frvKconfig  mipspowerpc   sparc  x86
> blackfin  h8300  m32r mn10300 s390  tile   x86_64
> 
> Am I missing something obvious?  Did I not need to name my destination
> architecture something from that directory?
> 
> -Ken

___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Joshua Judson Rosen]

"Brian St. Pierre"  writes:
>
> On 04/05/2012 09:20 AM, Ken D'Ambrosio wrote:
> > But... i386 seems to be missing as a possible architecture.  The closest I
> > could find was x86.  But this concerned me, because x86_64's bzImage is a 
> > soft
> > link to x86's.  Anyway, "What the hell," I thought, and compiled it.  
> > Installed
> > it.  Booted it.  And it works great!  Until I went to install Chrome.  
> > Chrome
> > said, "You're running a 64-bit OS; here's your 64-bit version."  I tried
> > installing that, and no soup.  32-bit version installed fine.  So then I
> > glanced at "uname -a":
> 
> Split the difference and call yourself 48-bit? ;)

You think you're joking, but it worked for ATM:



ATM broke up all packets, data, and voice streams into 48-byte
chunks, adding a 5-byte routing header to each one so that they
could be reassembled later. [...] parties from the United States
wanted a 64-byte payload because this was felt to be a good
compromise in larger payloads optimized for data transmission and
shorter payloads optimized for real-time applications like voice;
parties from Europe wanted 32-byte payloads because the small size
(and therefore short transmission times) simplify voice
applications with respect to echo cancellation. [...] 48 bytes
(plus 5 header bytes = 53) was chosen as a compromise between the
two sides. 5-byte headers were chosen because it was thought that
10% of the payload was the maximum price to pay for routing
information.

-- 
"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: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Tom Buskey]

I've been 64bit forawhile.  What does 32bit do that 64 won't?  Besides
browser plugins, though that's gotten beter too.

I installed 11.10 and then installed lxde and lubuntu over it so I didn't
have to learn Unity.  There is also xubuntu.

In my case I was debian 6.0x on the server and wanted a newer kernel with
btrfs and zfs on linux (via ppa)

I like being able to switch the ui part or anything else with debian based
dists.  I've found it was easier then with rpm based dist so I've switched.
On Apr 5, 2012 11:10 AM, "Ken D'Ambrosio"  wrote:

> Brian: I'm gonna pull the whole repo.  I really like btrfs, and anything
> pre-10.10 isn't recent enough to support it for an installation.  And I
> ain't
> doing 12.04 because, well, it ain't the epitome of the Linux user
> experience.
> ;-)
>
>
> On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 10:29:23 -0400 "Michael ODonnell"
>  wrote
>
> > BTW, for recent kernel sources I think the value you wanted to
> > use for ARCH is i686 rather than i386, even though the latter
> > may be what the "arch" command reports.
>
> Well... here's my /usr/src/linux/arch directory:
>
> alpha c6xhexagon  m68kopenrisc  score  um xtensa
> arm   cris   ia64 microblaze  pariscsh unicore32
> avr32 frvKconfig  mipspowerpc   sparc  x86
> blackfin  h8300  m32r mn10300 s390  tile   x86_64
>
> Am I missing something obvious?  Did I not need to name my destination
> architecture something from that directory?
>
> -Ken
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> gnhlug-discuss mailing list
> gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
> http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
>
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Ken D'Ambrosio]

Brian: I'm gonna pull the whole repo.  I really like btrfs, and anything
pre-10.10 isn't recent enough to support it for an installation.  And I ain't
doing 12.04 because, well, it ain't the epitome of the Linux user experience.
;-)


On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 10:29:23 -0400 "Michael ODonnell"
 wrote

> BTW, for recent kernel sources I think the value you wanted to
> use for ARCH is i686 rather than i386, even though the latter
> may be what the "arch" command reports.

Well... here's my /usr/src/linux/arch directory:

alpha c6xhexagon  m68kopenrisc  score  um xtensa
arm   cris   ia64 microblaze  pariscsh unicore32
avr32 frvKconfig  mipspowerpc   sparc  x86
blackfin  h8300  m32r mn10300 s390  tile   x86_64

Am I missing something obvious?  Did I not need to name my destination
architecture something from that directory?

-Ken





___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Brian St. Pierre]

On 04/05/2012 09:20 AM, Ken D'Ambrosio wrote:
> But... i386 seems to be missing as a possible architecture.  The closest I
> could find was x86.  But this concerned me, because x86_64's bzImage is a soft
> link to x86's.  Anyway, "What the hell," I thought, and compiled it.  
> Installed
> it.  Booted it.  And it works great!  Until I went to install Chrome.  Chrome
> said, "You're running a 64-bit OS; here's your 64-bit version."  I tried
> installing that, and no soup.  32-bit version installed fine.  So then I
> glanced at "uname -a":

Split the difference and call yourself 48-bit? ;)

I haven't done it recently, or with a far-backported kernel, but have
you considered building a debian/ubuntu kernel package that contains
what you want? It might help make sure everything matches up properly.

E.g.

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Kernel/Compile
http://wiki.debian.org/HowToRebuildAnOfficialDebianKernelPackage

Speaking from experience, you'll have a harder and harder time working
off an old non-LTS Ubuntu version. 10.10 isn't hard to live with now,
but mirrors, PPAs, and relevant advice will disappear pretty quickly
when it EOLs. (9.04 was a pain to work with by January 2011...) I'd
recommend either pinning to 10.04 LTS or 12.04 LTS (due on the 26th),
but that's just my $0.02. If you really want to stay on 10.10, grab a
copy of the DVD torrent now.

--
Brian St. Pierre
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Michael ODonnell]

It'd take some pretty bizarre build errors to generate a kernel
that describes itself as x86_64 when it isn't.  Therefore,
(assuming you're really running in the filesystem that your x86
system was based on) what's likely happening is that the exec()
machinery that allows mixed use of x86 and x86_64 binaries is
doing its thing and it wasn't until the Chrome installer asked
the kernel which flavor it is and then started looking for the
(absent) x86_64 loader and libraries that you even noticed.

BTW, for recent kernel sources I think the value you wanted to
use for ARCH is i686 rather than i386, even though the latter
may be what the "arch" command reports.

___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: EMACS - enabling at spi2 support

[Kevin D. Clark]

Susan Cragin writes:

> Does anyone know how to enable at-spi2 support in emacs?

Obviously, I think that you are smart enough to find atspi.el here:

  http://delysid.org/atspi.el

...and of course the comments in the elisp code list some
dependencies.


After you'll pulled down everything and installed the dependencies,
you might try typing something like:

   M-x load-file /some/path/to/atspi.el


Later on you might try adding something like:

   (require 'atspi)

...to your .emacs file.


I have no experience with "atspi" or "at-spi2", unfortunately.


I do hope this helps!

Regards,

--kevin
-- 
alumni.unh.edu!kdc / http://kdc-blog.blogspot.com/
GnuPG: D87F DAD6 0291 289C EB1E 781C 9BF8 A7D8 B280 F24E

And the Army Ants, they leave nothin' but the bones...
   -- Tom Waits
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

[Ken D'Ambrosio]

Okay, because I think that Ubuntu 10.10 with Compiz, the cube, wobbly windows
and Gnome 2.x is the epitome of the Linux experience, I've given up on more
recent stuff, and installed 10.10 -- 32-bit -- on my laptop.  But I'm a total
btrfs whore, so I installed that (aside from my /boot partition).  Buuut...
btrfs on whatever 10.10's kernel is is kinda flaky; blew up the FS the first
time I tried to create a subvolume.  So I booted a (very) recent random distro,
64-bit, with a 3.2 kernel, specifically because 3.2 has some magic in it to
help with unmountable btrfs drives.  Worked like a champ.  Then, still in my
64-bit OS, I downloaded a 3.3 kernel off kernel.org.  Since my base OS --
Ubuntu 10.10, as I installed it -- is 32-bit, I *wanted* to do a
make ARCH=i386 bzImage
But... i386 seems to be missing as a possible architecture.  The closest I
could find was x86.  But this concerned me, because x86_64's bzImage is a soft
link to x86's.  Anyway, "What the hell," I thought, and compiled it.  Installed
it.  Booted it.  And it works great!  Until I went to install Chrome.  Chrome
said, "You're running a 64-bit OS; here's your 64-bit version."  I tried
installing that, and no soup.  32-bit version installed fine.  So then I
glanced at "uname -a":

Linux galadriel 3.3.0 #2 SMP Wed Apr 4 13:04:22 EDT 2012 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Am I running a 64-bit kernel on a 32-bit OS?  Bwah?

-Ken





___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: EMACS - enabling at spi2 support

[Marc Nozell (m...@nozell.com)]

I don't know anything about at-spi2, but...

The 'apropos' command within emacs is useful for poking around as is the
info manuals (C-h i).

You won't see any el files unless you install emacs32-el and you don't need
that unless you are curious.  The compiled versions will on your system, so
look for *.elc files usually under /usr/share/emacs/

-marc

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Susan Cragin wrote:

> Does anyone know how to enable at-spi2 support in emacs?
> My understanding is that it doesn't automatically kick in when you start
> EMACS, but that there is a module you can load, and that the module is
> included with the program or available on the debian / ubuntu packaging.
> So far I've downloaded every likely candidate and there is nothing.
> (Where are EMACS's el's kept, anyway? I can't find the folder on my hard
> drive.)
> Thanks. I'm sort of an EMACS newbie.
> Susan Cragin
>
>
>
> ___
> gnhlug-discuss mailing list
> gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
> http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
>



-- 
Marc Nozell (m...@nozell.com) http://www.nozell.com/blog
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

EMACS - enabling at spi2 support

[Susan Cragin]

Does anyone know how to enable at-spi2 support in emacs?
My understanding is that it doesn't automatically kick in when you start EMACS, 
but that there is a module you can load, and that the module is included with 
the program or available on the debian / ubuntu packaging. 
So far I've downloaded every likely candidate and there is nothing. 
(Where are EMACS's el's kept, anyway? I can't find the folder on my hard drive.)
Thanks. I'm sort of an EMACS newbie. 
Susan Cragin



___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

[GNHLUG] [DLSLUG-Announce] DLSLUG Monthly Meeting 2012-04-05

[Lloyd Kvam]

Next Meeting Thursday Apr 5, 2012
A program of nifties and chat

Dartmouth College
Carson 060


5:30  Pre-meeting dinner at Everything But Anchovies.  
  That's a pizza joint on Allen Street by the Dartmouth Bookstore.  
  RSVP and bring cash.

7:00  Sign-in, networking

7:10  Introductory remarks

7:15  Nifties and chat
-

http://dlslug.org/pipermail/dlslug-discuss/2012-March/000750.html


Computer recycling April 9 and April 10.  Read the link for details if
you are interested. 


-

Next Meeting May 3

Ebooks: No Turning Back. 
How One Small Publisher is Coping With the New Realities




-- 
Lloyd Kvam
Venix Corp
DLSLUG/GNHLUG library
http://dlslug.org/library.html
http://www.librarything.com/catalog/dlslug
http://www.librarything.com/catalog/dlslug&sort=stamp
http://www.librarything.com/rss/recent/dlslug






___
DLSLUG-Announce mailing list
dlslug-annou...@dlslug.org
http://dlslug.org/mailman/listinfo/dlslug-announce
___
gnhlug-announce mailing list
gnhlug-annou...@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-announce/
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/