Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:15:56 +0200 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Although there are 64 bits releases of Linux, I wouldn't use it (yet),
but that is a personal choice. The most important reason (for me) is
problem when using additional software.
For example, the Flash plugin isn't working on a 64 bits system.
Likewise with Java.
Using a 32 bits release on a 64 bits system won't give you a problem
and offers all the software (like Flash and Java) without a problem.
More about it here:
http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/linux-tutorials-howtos-reference-material/69585-should-you-choose-32-bit-64-bit-linux.html
By the way, I did use a 64 bits release on our corporate webserver,
but mainly because I didn't intend to install additional (3rd party)
software on it.
Regards,
Patrick
2008/4/11, Jim McCarthy <[log in to unmask]>:
> Hello --
>
> I recently acquired an HP zx6000 dual Itanium-2 workstation, and so I was
> very pleased to find Scientific Linux (version 4.1) available for the IA-64
> architecture. But according to the SL news archive, SL 4.1 for ia64 was
> released 08-Aug-2005, and it appears none of the other SL 4.x or SL 5.x
> releases run on ia64.
>
> Are there many SL users running on ia64 ? Are there plans to continue SL
> support for this architecture ?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> -- Jim
> ___
>
> My SL 4.1-ia64 install went smoothly, and so far my only regret is finding
> that the Open Motif X11 window manager (mwm) "experimental" version 2.2
> (openmotif-2.2.3-9.RHEL4.1.ia64.rpm) was chosen for SL 4.1 (as well as for
> RHEL) and not the Open Group's officially supported and more stable
> "openmotif-2.1.30" release.
>
> http://www.motifdeveloper.com/tips/Motif22Review.pdf
>
|
|
|