ArchLinux is moving on again, how do you feel about it?

brain0 · 2006-05-24 15:07:23

Chris|MD wrote:

brain0 wrote:
It looks like 0.8 will have a completely redesigned installer and install cd.
When will it be released? 2008?

My guess is later this year, but who knows that for sure ...

I hope i get a nice modern linuxsystem before im dead...

I already have one.

The progress is so slow. Of most of the apps which are developed at the moment.
If i could code C or help with something else i would really do it. But theres no deeper look in the progress of that possible.

Stop complaining, learn C and do it yourself!

phrakture · 2006-05-24 16:54:03

cactus wrote:

Where are you, and how cheap is the crack you are smoking?
64bit has been around for *quite a while* now.
sparc, alpha... quite a while..

Yeah, from wikipedia:

The first version, the Alpha 21064 was introduced in 1992 running at 192 MHz, a slight shrink of the die (21064) ran at 200 Mhz a few months later.

I've worked on alot of old hardware like this. Namely, a 30-server VMS Alpha cluster (with a few older VAX machines in there).

I don't necessarilly believe that pure 64bit is "the future". Right now, many many processors use 32bit operations while having 64bit (or even more) memory bandwidth. So upping to 64bit is simply increasing the max size numbers can be. Whoopee!

There is too much history in the 32bit world, too much legacy, for it to die. Not everyone can afford the 'latest and greatest' hardware. I know people still using, as a family computer, Pentium machines. Alot of people here probably have some 486 machine running as a router (I used to, that thing rocked).

64bit architectures will not "replace" 32bit architectures. They will exist side by side. That's the only way it can work. They will exist in parallel.

codemac · 2006-05-24 18:50:18

I'm working on a 64-bit mainframe right now.

Yes dtw, I did see, then drastically miss your point :-P Very valid point, but your wording didn't make it so clear to me. I though you were saying that 64bit would never happen as opposed to saying that there will be more-bit machines after.

And phrakture, I disagree. As much as there is a lot of legacy in 32bit, I think we will phase out stuff as time goes on. Not to say that all 32bit machines will be burned, but kind of like the Mac PPC->Intel thing. They are parallel now, but slowly the ppc will disappear as the Intels are all better. Just because something has been around forever doesn't mean it will be around in the future.

brain0 · 2006-05-25 14:26:23

It happened. The glibc and gcc packages hit testing ...

damjan · 2006-05-30 01:13:11

Actually there's not a big benefit in using 64-bit processors vs 32-bit:
The pros:
- easy using of more than 4GB RAM in user-space
- 64-bit integer operations, like ADD, etc in a single instruction
- AMD64 brings more registers to the x86-register-starved architecture
The cons:
- 64-bit programs require more RAM
- bigger CPU caches
- more bus traffic
- more HDD space
= all that means CPUs/systems are more expensive and need more (electrical) power

Now there's a difference of 32 vs 64 bit in the x86 world and in PPC/Sparc worlds. That AMD64 has more register is a major improvement, but PPC and Sparc have enough (the same) registers in both 32 and 64 bit modes.

Now, not many applications need more than 4GB ram or 64bit integer operations, and all applications need RAM and cpu caches so the future will probably be hybrid 32/64 bit for some time. The kernel and specialized applications (scientific and databases) 64-bit and most of the other applications 32-bit.

Arch Linux

#26 2006-05-24 15:07:23

Re: ArchLinux is moving on again, how do you feel about it?

#27 2006-05-24 16:54:03

Re: ArchLinux is moving on again, how do you feel about it?

#28 2006-05-24 18:50:18

Re: ArchLinux is moving on again, how do you feel about it?

#29 2006-05-25 14:26:23

Re: ArchLinux is moving on again, how do you feel about it?

#30 2006-05-30 01:13:11

Re: ArchLinux is moving on again, how do you feel about it?

Board footer