Linux, 32 or 64 bits ? - Linux

This is a discussion on Linux, 32 or 64 bits ? - Linux ; This is my firts post at this newsgroup. I am going to install GNU/Linux on a HP computer with Dual Core 2 Duo processor. So I am downloading Debian ISO images to burn de DVDs. Then I had a doubt. ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Linux, 32 or 64 bits ?

  1. Linux, 32 or 64 bits ?

    This is my firts post at this newsgroup.

    I am going to install GNU/Linux on a HP computer with Dual Core 2 Duo
    processor. So I am downloading Debian ISO images to burn de DVDs. Then I
    had a doubt. Should I use 32 or 64 bits version ?. I have always used 32
    bits on earlier processors.

    If I choose 64 bit versions, shall I have problems with 32 bits binary
    software ?. For example, I don't know if there is a 32 bit and a 64 bit
    version of Adobe Acrobat Reader. If there was only a 32 bit version,
    could I use it with my 64 bit version of Linux ?.

    Which aditional problem (or problems) could I find with this issue ?.
    Any link that talks about this ?.

    Cheers,
    Angel Catala.


  2. Re: Linux, 32 or 64 bits ?

    Am Sat, 14 Apr 2007 11:59:01 +0200 schrieb ├Çngel Catal├*:

    > This is my firts post at this newsgroup.
    >
    > I am going to install GNU/Linux on a HP computer with Dual Core 2 Duo
    > processor. So I am downloading Debian ISO images to burn de DVDs. Then I
    > had a doubt. Should I use 32 or 64 bits version ?. I have always used 32
    > bits on earlier processors.
    >
    > If I choose 64 bit versions, shall I have problems with 32 bits binary
    > software ?. For example, I don't know if there is a 32 bit and a 64 bit
    > version of Adobe Acrobat Reader. If there was only a 32 bit version,
    > could I use it with my 64 bit version of Linux ?.
    >
    > Which aditional problem (or problems) could I find with this issue ?.
    > Any link that talks about this ?.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Angel Catala.


    Hi,

    im using openSuSE 64bit Linux for several months now without any problems.
    Sure, you can use 32 bit applications (i.e. Firefox, Acroread, Java...)
    in a 64 bit environment!

    Greetings,
    Harald

  3. Re: Linux, 32 or 64 bits ?

    └ngel CatalÓ wrote:
    > This is my firts post at this newsgroup.
    >
    > I am going to install GNU/Linux on a HP computer with Dual Core 2 Duo
    > processor. So I am downloading Debian ISO images to burn de DVDs. Then I
    > had a doubt. Should I use 32 or 64 bits version ?. I have always used 32
    > bits on earlier processors.


    The CPU is 64bit and is backward compatible with the 32bit architecture, so
    you can select different options

    1. 64bit (amd64)
    2. 64bit (amd64) with multilib (libs needed for tunning 32bits applications)
    3. 64bit (amd64) with chroot (old way to run 32bit stuff)
    4. 32bit (x86)
    5. dualboot 64bit (amd64) and 32bit (x86)

    I think the best option is 2, 64bit with multilib support (it's just the same
    install media as for option 1 and 3, but you select to install the 32bit-libs).


    > If I choose 64 bit versions, shall I have problems with 32 bits binary
    > software ?.


    If you have the multilibs installed, you will have a flexible system where you
    can use both 64bit and 32bit applications at the same time.

    There are those who uses chroot, then you install a full version of the 32bit
    environment in a directory, each time you want to use a 32bit program you need
    to chroot to that directory first. This is a quite hard disk space using way
    and it's not suited for multi user environments as chroot is usually only
    allowed as root.

    If you compile your own 64bit kernel, see to that the 32bit emulation is
    enabled, otherwise you won't be able to run 32bit applications (all the major
    distros who releases amd64 versions has this enabled).


    > For example, I don't know if there is a 32 bit and a 64 bit
    > version of Adobe Acrobat Reader.


    There is only for x86, but is easy to use in a multilib environment, no
    special installation procedures needed and works as well as any 64bit application.


    > Which aditional problem (or problems) could I find with this issue ?.
    > Any link that talks about this ?.


    Mozilla browsers (SeaMonkey, Firefox and so on), don't support 32bit plugins,
    but there is a work around for it, you need to install nspluginwrapper, it
    will be a middle layer between a Mozilla browser and the plugin.

    There is always the option to install a 32bit version of the Mozilla browser,
    but then you may get problems with plugins that are 64bit and there isn't any
    wrapper to use.

    Konqueror, which is part of KDE, will work well with 32bit plugins, as the
    communication between the plugin and browser is handled in another way than on
    Mozilla browsers.

    Opera is only released as x86, so it will only be able to use 32bit plugins
    and if you want spell correction in it, you need to install 32bit aspell,
    which can break spelling in other applications as those are 64bit and need a
    64bit version of aspell.


    --

    //Aho

  4. Re: Linux, 32 or 64 bits ?

    J.O. Aho escribiˇ:
    > └ngel CatalÓ wrote:
    >> This is my firts post at this newsgroup.
    >>
    >> I am going to install GNU/Linux on a HP computer with Dual Core 2 Duo
    >> processor. So I am downloading Debian ISO images to burn de DVDs. Then I
    >> had a doubt. Should I use 32 or 64 bits version ?. I have always used 32
    >> bits on earlier processors.

    >
    > The CPU is 64bit and is backward compatible with the 32bit architecture, so
    > you can select different options
    >
    > 1. 64bit (amd64)
    > 2. 64bit (amd64) with multilib (libs needed for tunning 32bits applications)
    > 3. 64bit (amd64) with chroot (old way to run 32bit stuff)
    > 4. 32bit (x86)
    > 5. dualboot 64bit (amd64) and 32bit (x86)
    >


    I don't know if this is important or not, but the processor is not an
    AMD, it's an Intel, so I should use x86_64 instead of amd64. Is this true ?.

    Many thanks for your information.

    Angel.

  5. Re: Linux, 32 or 64 bits ?

    J.O. Aho escribiˇ:
    > └ngel CatalÓ wrote:
    >> This is my firts post at this newsgroup.
    >>
    >> I am going to install GNU/Linux on a HP computer with Dual Core 2 Duo
    >> processor. So I am downloading Debian ISO images to burn de DVDs. Then I
    >> had a doubt. Should I use 32 or 64 bits version ?. I have always used 32
    >> bits on earlier processors.

    >
    > The CPU is 64bit and is backward compatible with the 32bit architecture, so
    > you can select different options
    >
    > 1. 64bit (amd64)
    > 2. 64bit (amd64) with multilib (libs needed for tunning 32bits applications)
    > 3. 64bit (amd64) with chroot (old way to run 32bit stuff)
    > 4. 32bit (x86)
    > 5. dualboot 64bit (amd64) and 32bit (x86)
    >


    I don't know if this is important or not, but the processor is not an
    AMD, it's an Intel, so I should use x86_64 instead of amd64. Is this true ?.

    Many thanks for your information.

    Angel.

  6. Re: Linux, 32 or 64 bits ?

    └ngel CatalÓ wrote:
    > J.O. Aho escribiˇ:
    >> └ngel CatalÓ wrote:
    >>> This is my firts post at this newsgroup.
    >>>
    >>> I am going to install GNU/Linux on a HP computer with Dual Core 2 Duo
    >>> processor. So I am downloading Debian ISO images to burn de DVDs. Then I
    >>> had a doubt. Should I use 32 or 64 bits version ?. I have always used 32
    >>> bits on earlier processors.

    >>
    >> The CPU is 64bit and is backward compatible with the 32bit
    >> architecture, so
    >> you can select different options
    >>
    >> 1. 64bit (amd64)
    >> 2. 64bit (amd64) with multilib (libs needed for tunning 32bits
    >> applications)
    >> 3. 64bit (amd64) with chroot (old way to run 32bit stuff)
    >> 4. 32bit (x86)
    >> 5. dualboot 64bit (amd64) and 32bit (x86)
    >>

    >
    > I don't know if this is important or not, but the processor is not an
    > AMD, it's an Intel, so I should use x86_64 instead of amd64. Is this
    > true ?.


    As AMD was first out with a CPU which both supported 64 and 32 bit
    architecture, distros do call the version that is for 64bit for amd64, there
    may be others who has chosen to call it x86_64. If a distro has both x86_64
    and amd64, then you better take the x86_64 version.


    --

    //Aho

  7. Re: Linux, 32 or 64 bits ?


    > As AMD was first out with a CPU which both supported 64 and 32 bit
    > architecture, distros do call the version that is for 64bit for amd64, there
    > may be others who has chosen to call it x86_64. If a distro has both x86_64
    > and amd64, then you better take the x86_64 version.
    >


    You are right. I was downloading Debian IA64 version thinking of it was
    x86_64. But I have noticed that amd64 and em64t versions are both called
    amd64 within Debian.

    Thanks again.



  8. Re: Linux, 32 or 64 bits ?

    └ngel CatalÓ wrote:
    >
    >> As AMD was first out with a CPU which both supported 64 and 32 bit
    >> architecture, distros do call the version that is for 64bit for amd64,
    >> there
    >> may be others who has chosen to call it x86_64. If a distro has both
    >> x86_64
    >> and amd64, then you better take the x86_64 version.

    >
    > You are right. I was downloading Debian IA64 version thinking of it was
    > x86_64.


    That works only on those Itanium CPUs from Intel, even if it's too is 64bit,
    it's not compatible with the amd64/em64t and nVidia seemed to drop support for
    it, as the ia64 driver hasn't been updated for ages.


    > But I have noticed that amd64 and em64t versions are both called
    > amd64 within Debian.


    That will be tha case in others, if you decide to test another distro.

    --

    //Aho

  9. Re: Linux, 32 or 64 bits ?

    Dr. Harald Springer escribi├│:
    > Am Sat, 14 Apr 2007 11:59:01 +0200 schrieb ├Çngel Catal├*:
    >
    >> This is my firts post at this newsgroup.
    >>
    >> I am going to install GNU/Linux on a HP computer with Dual Core 2 Duo
    >> processor. So I am downloading Debian ISO images to burn de DVDs. Then I
    >> had a doubt. Should I use 32 or 64 bits version ?. I have always used 32
    >> bits on earlier processors.
    >>
    >> If I choose 64 bit versions, shall I have problems with 32 bits binary
    >> software ?. For example, I don't know if there is a 32 bit and a 64 bit
    >> version of Adobe Acrobat Reader. If there was only a 32 bit version,
    >> could I use it with my 64 bit version of Linux ?.
    >>
    >> Which aditional problem (or problems) could I find with this issue ?.
    >> Any link that talks about this ?.
    >>
    >> Cheers,
    >> Angel Catala.

    >
    > Hi,
    >
    > im using openSuSE 64bit Linux for several months now without any problems.
    > Sure, you can use 32 bit applications (i.e. Firefox, Acroread, Java...)
    > in a 64 bit environment!
    >
    > Greetings,
    > Harald


    Thanks for your answer.

+ Reply to Thread