Andrew Robinson wrote:
Well I made the rough decision last night and switched back to 32b.
After reading some benchmarks it didn't look like 64b was going to
benefit me much. This is a home desktop computer so the 32b will fit
me fine. Just a shame to give up the extra functionality.
Perhaps in
I find this whole discussion interesting. I have been using Debian
unstable AMD64 for 3 years now. I currently have Ubuntu (32 bit)
installed on another partition (as a back up for those rare times when
I have upgraded and lost X or had some other temporary problem). I
have been thinking about swi
> "Robert" == Robert Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Robert> That leaves you with two reasons to have a 32bit chroot,
Robert> hardly a headache but it is after all your choice. Myself I
Robert> have been using a 32bit chroot mainly for the video codices
Robert> and wine since before the
> "Robert" == Robert Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Robert> That leaves you with two reasons to have a 32bit chroot,
Robert> hardly a headache but it is after all your choice. Myself I
Robert> have been using a 32bit chroot mainly for the video codices
Robert> and wine since before the
On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 12:38:45AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> U?ytkownik edwardsa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisa?:
> >I have a question about your claim of performance degradation. See below.
>
> > ...
>
> >Is this degradation true for all applications? To be clear, are you
> >saying that if
Użytkownik edwardsa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał:
>I have a question about your claim of performance degradation. See below.
> ...
>Is this degradation true for all applications? To be clear, are you
>saying that if
>I compile a fortran code using either pgi, or the 64-bit libraries of
>g77, tha
On 9/1/06, edwardsa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't import powerpoint files. For a government lab, where
> productivity can, at times, seem synonymous with productivity, this
> can be really annoying. I'm a chroot now.
What I really meant was that power point can, at times, seem synomymous
w
edwardsa wrote:
Thierry Chatelet wrote:
Jan De Luyck wrote:
On Friday 01 September 2006 14:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I have read recently - it is not:( Saving files is not yet
supported... But I read it on some website found by google and am
not sure
if it wasn't some old news.
Thierry Chatelet wrote:
Jan De Luyck wrote:
On Friday 01 September 2006 14:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I have read recently - it is not:( Saving files is not yet
supported... But I read it on some website found by google and am
not sure
if it wasn't some old news.
http://openof
I have switched to 64-bit because I do scientific calculations and the
added address-space is crucial, and the added speed is, well, very nice.
I also think that
64-bit linux is not really ready for prime-time. It's not just the
absence of a 64-bit
OO (flash is completely superfluous). I'm just
> For those that have the knowledge, I know that the 64 bit architecture
> is faster due to addressing and such, but is it that noticeable? Also,
I have 33% performance bonus with oggenc and mencoder (xvid and lavc
encoding). It's enough for me to stick with 64 bit.
Just my USD 0.02.
Vit
--
T
Well I made the rough decision last night and switched back to 32b.
After reading some benchmarks it didn't look like 64b was going to
benefit me much. This is a home desktop computer so the 32b will fit
me fine. Just a shame to give up the extra functionality.
Perhaps in a few years I may try 64
On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 15:53 +0200, Jan De Luyck wrote:
> On Friday 01 September 2006 15:30, Matthew Robinson wrote:
> > Doesn't Koffice work in 64bit? What about abiword, gnumeric, etc?
>
> Koffice doesn't really do what I need, since it unfortunatly does include
> reading MSWord files. The impor
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 02:30:50PM +0100, Matthew Robinson wrote:
> Doesn't Koffice work in 64bit? What about abiword, gnumeric, etc?
>
Does Koffice MS-WORD/EXCEL plugin work?
--
Sythos - http://www.sythos.net
() ASCII Ribbon Campaign - against html/rtf/vCard in mail
/\
On Friday 01 September 2006 15:30, Matthew Robinson wrote:
> Doesn't Koffice work in 64bit? What about abiword, gnumeric, etc?
Koffice doesn't really do what I need, since it unfortunatly does include
reading MSWord files. The import filters of koffice usually crash instead of
doing anything.
A
Albert Dengg wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 02:58:51PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
U?ytkownik Jan De Luyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisa?:
Openoffice. I'm tempted to try out the 64-bit build for the latter... anyone
here with experience on
Jan De Luyck wrote:
On Friday 01 September 2006 14:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I have read recently - it is not:( Saving files is not yet
supported... But I read it on some website found by google and am not sure
if it wasn't some old news.
http://openoffice.debian.net/ lists ju
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 02:58:51PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> U?ytkownik Jan De Luyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisa?:
> >Openoffice. I'm tempted to try out the 64-bit build for the latter... anyone
> >here with experience on that? Is it any usable
On Friday 01 September 2006 14:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What I have read recently - it is not:( Saving files is not yet
> supported... But I read it on some website found by google and am not sure
> if it wasn't some old news.
http://openoffice.debian.net/ lists just that. I'll guess i'll h
Użytkownik Jan De Luyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał:
>Openoffice. I'm tempted to try out the 64-bit build for the latter... anyone
>here with experience on that? Is it any usable?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jan
What I have read recently - it is not:( Saving files is not yet supported...
But I read it on some
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 10:50:32AM +0200, Lubos Vrbka wrote:
> maybe you could also run 64bit kernel with 32bit userspace... not doing
> that personally, i am happy with amd64 port, but it might be worth
> trying, there are some reports of this on d-u...
That works very well. We have a couple of
On Thursday 31 August 2006 21:11, Andrew Robinson wrote:
> Looking for some constructive feedback on other people's experiences
As a fairly new AMD64 user, I have to say that maintaining a 32-bit chroot is
relatively painless.
I've gotten used to using 'apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade;
As a server I would think it would be great but as a workstation it
seems to be a pain. The chroot jail works, but having to maintain the
apt libraries (I am using etch, so they change fairly often), it more
of a pain.
For those that have the knowledge, I know that the 64 bit architecture
is fast
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Jack Malmostoso wrote:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 21:20:09 +0200, Andrew Robinson wrote:
Just looking for some constructive feedback on other's opinions.
The answer is really easy: if you feel it's a pain then switch back to the
32bit.
I agree completely. It just boils down t
On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 01:11:08PM -0600, Andrew Robinson wrote:
> Looking for some constructive feedback on other people's experiences
> with amd64 as a workstation. I have been only using it a few weeks,
> and the setup is a pain due to the amount of 32 bit only programs. I
> am having some issue
Andrew Robinson wrote:
Looking for some constructive feedback on other people's experiences
with amd64 as a workstation. I have been only using it a few weeks,
and the setup is a pain due to the amount of 32 bit only programs. I
am having some issues with:
Eclipse + ExadelStudio plugin (plugin i
if the majority of your applications are running 32bit chroot anyway,
then most likely 32bit would be the way to go
i have been running 64bit workstation for over a year now and the
only application i use 'heavily' in 32bit is cedega (and occasionally
but not often wine).
dont be ashamed to use t
Firefox + Flash (Flash is 32-bit only)
There are open alternatives that work 64 bit native (let's be honest,
flash 7 is broken anyway what is the big deal if certain sites crash
the player or won't play at all?)
OpenOffice
Understandable here, everyone needs an office suite but there is a 64
bi
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 21:20:09 +0200, Andrew Robinson wrote:
> Just looking for some constructive feedback on other's opinions.
The answer is really easy: if you feel it's a pain then switch back to the
32bit.
I am perfectly happy with my 64bit setup, but the only thing I need 32bit
are OO.o and Op
I thinlk you must anwer yourself a question:
What do you need more: 64bits or all the software that is not available for
64bit debian?
I chose 64bits (need 'em for my scientific calculations) though
am having the same problems with flash, ooo, etc, and have to wait
patiently for 64bit versions of
Hi Andrew:
My workstation (not server) is operated by amd64 and I could not achieve the
same at the half floating point of 32bit.
I see two reasons to move to 64 bit: crunking numbers (as in my case) or games
(or other particularly demanding animated graphics).
Otherwise, why moving to the mo
31 matches
Mail list logo
