On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 05:40:09AM +0200, Micha Feigin wrote:
> As for applications, the only one I'm missing at the moment is a 64bit version
> of skype (you can still run the static version), most everything else has 64
> bit versions I believe (at least things I use)
Not tovid, that I could see
Stefan Monnier wrote:
Well, I guess that is a matter of philosophy. I did not think a bigmem
kernel was "stock".
AFAIK "stock kernel" in this context means that I did not build my own.
I just "aptitude install linux-image-2.6.28-1-686-bigmem" and go on with
my life.
Also, we might have a dis
> It's a different approach taken than the 1:3 gb split. You are paying
> a performance penalty for accessing the higher part of the memory as
> it requires trickery and you will probably see a gain by using a amd64
> kernel (you can keep the 32bit userspace)
It has its advantages and disadvantage
> Well, I guess that is a matter of philosophy. I did not think a bigmem
> kernel was "stock".
AFAIK "stock kernel" in this context means that I did not build my own.
I just "aptitude install linux-image-2.6.28-1-686-bigmem" and go on with
my life.
> Also, we might have a discussion of the meani
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:20:16 +0100
Chris wrote:
> I went ahead and installed the 64 bit version. I'm actually very happy
> at the performance.
>
ya i went to 64 last night too and we're sure that things are working
faster - particularly starting applications! this discussion has been
very enlight
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 02:22:58 +
Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 06:47:56PM -0500, Chris wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:50:50PM -0700, prad wrote:
> > > >
> > > > i am running the 32bit version of lenny.
> >
> > Interesting... If one has 32-bit installed, is there s
Micha Feigin wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 18:54:58 -0500
Mark Allums wrote:
Oops, make that *3* GB or less. The PC architecture allows more, but
while 4 GB fits into 32-bits, the video card and other hardware is
memory-mapped into the upper GB, so the 4th GB of physical memory must
be rema
Stefan Monnier wrote:
In theory, with PAE segments you can address that memory with a 32-bit
OS, but in practice, 64-bit is required.
Actually, practice suggests otherwise:
% uname -a
Linux pastel 2.6.28-1-686-bigmem #1 SMP Mon Feb 23 04:05:37 UTC 2009 i686
GNU/Linux
% free
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 23:08:03 -0400
Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > In theory, with PAE segments you can address that memory with a 32-bit
> > OS, but in practice, 64-bit is required.
>
> Actually, practice suggests otherwise:
>
>% uname -a
>Linux pastel 2.6.28-1-686-bigmem #1 SMP Mon Feb 23 0
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 18:54:58 -0500
Mark Allums wrote:
> Mark Allums wrote:
> > prad wrote:
> >> i've recently returned to debian on a amd64 3400+ machine with 1G ram
> >> in it.
> >>
> >> i am running the 32bit version of lenny.
> >>
> >> would there be benefits to use 64bit lenny instead?
> >>
>
> In theory, with PAE segments you can address that memory with a 32-bit
> OS, but in practice, 64-bit is required.
Actually, practice suggests otherwise:
% uname -a
Linux pastel 2.6.28-1-686-bigmem #1 SMP Mon Feb 23 04:05:37 UTC 2009 i686
GNU/Linux
% free
total us
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 06:47:56PM -0500, Chris wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:50:50PM -0700, prad wrote:
> > >
> > > i am running the 32bit version of lenny.
>
> Interesting... If one has 32-bit installed, is there some sort of
> upgrade / overwrite to the 64-bit version?
At present,
prad wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 18:54:58 -0500
Mark Allums wrote:
I recommend 64-bits for new installs, but for existing setups, there
is no need to update, unless you have specific needs.
this is good advice. however, since i have just installed lenny with
the intent of experimenting with i
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 18:54:58 -0500
Mark Allums wrote:
> I recommend 64-bits for new installs, but for existing setups, there
> is no need to update, unless you have specific needs.
>
this is good advice. however, since i have just installed lenny with
the intent of experimenting with it (came fro
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 23:35:41 +
Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:50:50PM -0700, prad wrote:
> > i've recently returned to debian on a amd64 3400+ machine with 1G
> > ram in it.
> >
> > i am running the 32bit version of lenny.
> >
> > would there be benefits to use 64bit lenny
Mark Allums wrote:
prad wrote:
i've recently returned to debian on a amd64 3400+ machine with 1G ram
in it.
i am running the 32bit version of lenny.
would there be benefits to use 64bit lenny instead?
in the archives, i found posts suggesting there is no benefit unless
you are using 64-bit ap
prad wrote:
i've recently returned to debian on a amd64 3400+ machine with 1G ram
in it.
i am running the 32bit version of lenny.
would there be benefits to use 64bit lenny instead?
in the archives, i found posts suggesting there is no benefit unless
you are using 64-bit apps that require extr
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:50:50PM -0700, prad wrote:
> i've recently returned to debian on a amd64 3400+ machine with 1G ram
> in it.
>
> i am running the 32bit version of lenny.
>
> would there be benefits to use 64bit lenny instead?
Yes.
> in the archives, i found posts suggesting there is n
i've recently returned to debian on a amd64 3400+ machine with 1G ram
in it.
i am running the 32bit version of lenny.
would there be benefits to use 64bit lenny instead?
in the archives, i found posts suggesting there is no benefit unless
you are using 64-bit apps that require extra processing p
19 matches
Mail list logo
