lubuntu-desktop team mailing list archive

[Phillip Whiteside <phillw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

as I noted in my P.S. earlier, 64Bit is not on the list of things to be done
with lubuntu. Just as using it on a blade server is not the reason it was
developed, nor I expect did the devs consider that it would be used to run a
LAMP server, be put on top of RAID or a million other 'odd' things that
people do such as dual-screen use.

Their efforts are being devoted to 32Bit, the minimal install using 64Bit
was an offshoot from there not as yet being a minimal installation CD for
those with less RAM than needed to run Ubiquity (160MB free RAM) and not
wishing to go setting up swap space manually before doing an installation.

Regards,

Phill.



On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:40 PM, CAD Outsourcing <CADout@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Your question opens a higher-level debate, and this is why I'm answering.
> I'd be curious to know why you "need to know" this. Did one of your friends
> argue "it's not a "true" 64bit..."?
>
> 64bit OS adds 2 main benefits:
> * memory addressing that is much much larger (so large in fact that your
> computer isn't high peformance enough to handle it),
> * and allowing 64bit applications to run - where it makes a difference is
> CAD, especially 3D solid modeling.
> *with the exception of the new intel multicore i3 i5 i7 processors, your
> computer will be SLOWER running a mix of 32bit and 64 bit applications
> (meaning, if you run 32bit Office, or ANY 32bit stuff, it will be slower,
> and you'll never get 100% 64bit apps and utils going - not in a free OS
> anyways).
>
> So, are you running a server or server farm perhaps?  You wouldn't select
> Lubuntu for that anyways.  In fact, I don't even know why they BOTHER
> allocating resources to maintaining a 64 bit version, when there is lots of
> bugs to iron out in the 32 bit edition.
> IMHO distros should be labeled differently, to make it clearer to users
> that your computer will probably run faster with the 32-bit optimised
> version, and that you install the 64bit only if you have 64bit specific
> applications, like a $5000 Autodesk Inventor software... which incidentally,
> DOESN'T run under Linux anyways!  What are we left with, in 64bit under
> Linux?  Maybe some multi-media editing stuff... well, there IS a 64bit
> Ubuntu that does just that, already out there.
>
> Lubuntu's very reason of existence is because people don't like the fact
> that Linux has gotten bloated and is starting to slow down 3 year old
> machines.
> Because on a Core2Duo and higher (like the new i3 i5 i7 multi-core
> processors), you don't feel a difference in the slightest... BUT the current
> state of this OS does make itself felt!  And with a fast machine, after much
> frustration and working really hard to make it work, you find yourself
> scrambling to go back to Mint-Ubuntu, Ubuntu... or Xubuntu which has been
> around longer and does pretty well on slower hardware, and allows owners of
> faster machines that satisfaction of knowing their OS has less bloat.
>
> Before we devote programmer time to develop a 64bit version, which is in
> contradiction to the need this OS wants to fullfill, maybe we should iron
> out the bugs in the standard 32bit edition first.  Just my opinion...
> because right now, Lubuntu is BETA at best!  And I'm really pissed that they
> label it final release, and waste valuable resources for stuff no one
> needs.  After all, if you have a slower PC, netbook, whatever, that requires
> Lubuntu, WHY oh WHY would you need, and WHAT would you do with, a 64bit
> version in the first place?
>
> Wanting to maintain too many versions before you get one version straight,
> is only bad for the distro.  Hence the harsh words, because the Lubuntu team
> is really shooting themselves in the foot here... especially if they want
> canonical to endorse them one day.  Get it right, and then see if you want
> to branch out in to other versions (especially if they go contrary to the
> distro's mission).
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 04:13, M. Daub <m.daub@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Hello *,
>>
>> it's good to read that the installation of the 64-bit-mini-iso and
>> installation of the lubuntu-desktop-meta-package results in a functional
>> system!
>>
>> In a "normal" 64-bit-distribution the core-packages (exec and libraries)
>> are
>> provided as 64-bit-compiled executables.
>>
>> Has someone an overview, whether the lxde-components and the default apps
>> are
>> compiled as 64-bit or are they provided as 32-bit?
>>
>> If some components are only provided as 32-bit, are there any concerns
>> about
>> such a mixed-system?
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
>> Post to     : lubuntu-desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to     : lubuntu-desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>