You are not logged in.
I do feel I had enough on arch64, no native java, flash, support. NO google gears....... Some 64bit packages are buggy.
I so have 4GB RAM, but I barely use that much memory.
I decide to go back to 32 bit and I may install arch64 on a separate partition for some multimedia software I may learn to use in the future and take the benefit or 64bit.
So, my question is
Is there any easy way to convert my whole system back into 32bits, and keep all my installed package (including some build from AUR) the same?
Offline
Well, no easy way that I know of.
you could dump out a script via:
pacman -Qte | awk '{printf "pacman -S %s\n", $1}' > reinstall-packages.shand then reinstall your system, then run that script after it is reinstalled. The AUR stuff, well, if you use yaourt instead of pacman in the above script that may work.
I don't think there is any clean way to convert from arch64 to arch32. It is almost like saying I want to convert my system from arch32 to archppc. Yes, I know, arch64 can run 32 bit code, but still, it is a different architecture.
Offline
Some 64bit packages are buggy.
There are no such packages.
I decide to go back to 32 bit...
IMHO, a foolish course of action.
Offline
phabulosa wrote:Some 64bit packages are buggy.
There are no such packages.
phabulosa wrote:I decide to go back to 32 bit...
IMHO, a foolish course of action.
What is your problem?
Why the hell do you have to write in every thread about this subject that "There are no buggy packages", "There are no games for GNU/Linux" and so on?
You know. You're a fucking innoing troll.
I have been a member of this forum since yesterday and you have already prooven that you have no knowlege in the subject.
Offline
phabulosa wrote:Some 64bit packages are buggy.
There are no such packages.
Well, I've been using x86_64 linux distro's since 2003.
There are packages that are buggy that have their bugs exposed when compiled for x86_64, but the faultly/problematic code still exists in the source code, regardless of what it is compiled for.
That being said, in reality I only run into issues with proprietary junk that is not released for x86_64. For the most part I could ignore the proprietary junk, expect that many ignorant people tend to distribute content that requires the silly proprietary stuff.
If one wants to use both 32 and 64 bit packages on the same system, then one can use 32 bit packages for 64 (does work for some stuff), use a 32 bit chroot (better), or use something like opensuse, centos, or fedora (?) where 32 and 64 bit packages can be installed on the same system (a compromise).
phabulosa wrote:I decide to go back to 32 bit...
IMHO, a foolish course of action.
Personally I don't see any point in running 32. I look at running 32 bit as a cop out. But I can understand why someone would want to. Running 64 bit can be a hassle, and sometimes I wonder what exactly I benefit from it. Here is the deal, x86_32 is a subset of x86_64, and it bothers me to run in what I consider "legacy mode" on a modern system.
What is your problem?
Why the hell do you have to write in every thread about this subject that "There are no buggy packages", "There are no games for GNU/Linux" and so on?
You know. You're a ______ innoing troll.
I have been a member of this forum since yesterday and you have already prooven that you have no knowlege in the subject.
What is innoing?
Annoying to you maybe. It is the humble opinion of wantilles, one I happen to share.
But kratz, I'll agree with you on this (if this indeed is a point you were somehow trying to make, but did not)
Anybody should be able to ask a technical question on these forums, and get an honest technical answer, instead of an inflammatory biased one. Of course the obvious Huh, now why would you want to do that? is obviously warranted where appropriate.
Last edited by dschauer (2008-04-25 12:55:59)
Offline
What is innoing?
Annoying to you maybe. It is the humble opinion of wantilles, one I happen to share.
But kratz, I'll agree with you on this (if this indeed is a point you were somehow trying to make, but did not)
Anybody should be able to ask a technical question on these forums, and get an honest technical answer, instead of an inflammatory biased one. Of course the obvious Huh, now why would you want to do that? is obviously warranted where appropriate.
I agree.
My English is not the best (Im from Sweden) and therefor it may be easy to misunderstand, Especially when I misspell, but I hope that most of the persons can accept that;)
And I maybe overreacted, but I really get upset when people don't give any relevant information at all and come with completely absurd statements.
Offline
wantilles wrote:I have been a member of this forum since yesterday and you have already prooven that you have no knowlege in the subject.
I have been running Arch Linux amd64 for over 11 months (*), with full functionality, without a single issue.
Is that the "no knowledge on the subject" that I have?
(*) Before that, I had been running Debian Unstable amd64 for 3 months, and Gentoo amd64 for another 21 months.
Offline
kratz wrote:wantilles wrote:I have been a member of this forum since yesterday and you have already prooven that you have no knowlege in the subject.
I have been running Arch Linux amd64 for over 11 months (*), with full functionality, without a single issue.
Is that the "no knowledge on the subject" that I have?
(*) Before that, I had been running Debian Unstable amd64 for 3 months, and Gentoo amd64 for another 21 months.
Now its bragingtime.
I have used nothing but GNU/Linux and other *nix- systems since 1999 and Archlinux as distro since 2004.
I work in *nix- environment at a daily basis at work and I still consider myself as a beginner.
I could go on about this for 10 pages, but I choose not to.
You have been using GNU/* a couple of years?
That does'nt justify that you think that you are "mister know it all without exceptions".
Offline
Whatever.
I cut my teeth in computers with Unix back in 1984, then over the next several years used MS-DOS, AmigaDOS, and Windows 3.1..
Started using GNU/Linux and BSD in 1996. Started using 64 bit Linux/BSD on all machines I control that supported it since 2003.
I would not call myself a beginner, but I can't say I've not had issues with any Linux or BSD distro, regardless of them being 32 or 64 bit.
I'm sure that phabulosa did not get a desirable answer, and now we are all just ragging on each other and trying to one up the other.
Last edited by dschauer (2008-04-25 14:54:00)
Offline
wantilles wrote:I work in *nix- environment at a daily basis at work and I still consider myself as a beginner.
I have been using Linux since 2004.
And I still consider myself as someone who has barely scratched the surface.
Offline
I'm sure that phabulosa did not get a desirable answer, and now we are all just ragging on each other and trying to one up the other.
You´re right. Completly stupid OT.
I have been using Linux since 2004.
And I still consider myself as someone who has barely scratched the surface.
One thing I dont understand is why you make statements like "There are no such packets" and that you are so sure of it and "correcting" all the other persons who have answered if you just think you scrached the suface?
Well. End of discussion. This wont help phabulosa anyway.
Offline
Hey, guys. Calm down.
I didn't expect to see this much disturbance my post caused.
I CHANGED MY MIND.
I will stay with ARCH64 after trying out 32bit Chroot method yesterday. It works great!
I have to admit that I am happy with Arch64 99.9% time, but the 0.1% was just killing me.
For an example, I have to use openoffice to help my wife edit her teaching material. However, I experienced this bug
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/10035?pr … pened=2394
I really don't want to give up Awesome/DWM, but I was just unable to work.
Also, there are many things which are not pure breed GNU software. However, I may need to use it.
For an example, Google Gears. I want to try it out and I don't want to wait for the official support of 64bit support....
I can give many examples like this, Amazon MP3 downloader, Adobe Air ......
Many of these new stuff has its merits, but the 64 bit linux support is just so poor.
Luckily, I am happily running a 32bit chroot environment now.
No more complain so far, except that I still have to learn how to compile some AUR within chroot environment. The compile process fails sometimes, it seems to pick up 64bit library.
Last edited by phabulosa (2008-04-25 16:25:19)
Offline
One thing I dont understand is why you make statements like "There are no such packets" and that you are so sure of it and "correcting" all the other persons who have answered if you just think you scrached the suface?
Because people tend to have - for no reason - 64-bit-phobia.
Offline
kratz wrote:One thing I dont understand is why you make statements like "There are no such packets" and that you are so sure of it and "correcting" all the other persons who have answered if you just think you scrached the suface?
Because people tend to have - for no reason - 64-bit-phobia.
I really dont have. I have used 64-bit a lot on servers. There is no reason not to use it on servers, but there are on a desktop imo.
Offline