Recommendations...

[Jerry Feldman]

On 06/16/2010 09:20 AM, Michael ODonnell wrote:
> Well, when you've got an installed base of venerable yet cantankerous
> 32bit apps that are tuned for that 4Gb virtual space and need to
> interoperate with a bunch of 3rd party apps and libs and drivers that are
> also 32bit and it would be a bitch to port them to 64bit and requalify
> them all over again and oh yeah they're running on 32bit machines that
> have plenty of life in them and all you wanted was to get the benefits
> of running a newer kernel but now that feature you were using has been
> discontinued....  that's one scenario.  Guess how I know.
32-bit apps run fine in a 64-bit Linux OS, and in many cases better
since the OS can manage memory a bit more efficiently. The downside is
that you need to install the required 32-bit libraries too. So far, I
have not seen a 32-bit application that could not run on a 64-bit Linux
OS. They are still running native, but they think they are running in a
32-bit OS eventhough the drivers themselves may be 64-bit drivers.

-- 
Jerry Feldman <gaf at blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix
PGP key id: 537C5846
PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB  CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20100616/45bdebd3/attachment.bin