Question for 64 bit users

denn1s · 2011-09-15 00:06:16

Hello everyone, I've got a really general question so I don't know if I posted it in the correct subforum, if not, please move.

My question goes like this:

¿Does a 64 bit archlinux has all the tools I need?

I'm a freelance programmer so I do a lot of work in my desktop computer, which doubles as my development server; so I'm thinking of getting a new desktop with more than 4GB of RAM.

Most of my work needs: apache, mysql (mysql workbench) and php, but may need windows stuff which I get from virtualbox,
as well as other scripting languages like python and ruby.

For web development, I need a stable and update version of all mayor web browsers, in firefox's case it would be great to have firebug.

Also, I like to use wine and mplayer. I don't really care about flash player or java stuff (perhaps jdownloader may be an exception).

I'm asking this because some years ago I tried a 64 bit OS and i found it incomplete and unstable, but I'm sure it must be a lot better now. I don't really mind if I have to go and compile stuff as long as the result is stable and update.
I already checked Google and confirmed there 64 bit versions of all my apps, but I would still like your opinion on if they are functional (64 bit mplayer used to be pretty bad, mysql workbench used to crash every 2 clic's, etc.)

Thank you and sorry for the long post.

lifeafter2am · 2011-09-15 00:10:02

I have, literally, yet to find something I can't run.

cesura · 2011-09-15 00:28:03

I'd have to agree with lifeafter2am, I've never encountered a situation where I've had to forgo the usage of an application because it wasn't 64-bit compatible. Especially in the area of programming, as upstream is usually good about making multi-architecture releases.

Oh, and just a note: English doesn't begin sentences with a question mark like Spanish does.

graysky · 2011-09-15 00:42:32

lifeafter2am wrote:

I have, literally, yet to find something I can't run.

+1 for me

the sad clown · 2011-09-15 00:42:35

Same here. I have had no trouble with 64bit. All of the browsers I have tried work fine (firefox, chromium, opera, etc). And I use mplayer at least weekly. Works great.

Last edited by the sad clown (2011-09-15 00:43:18)

denn1s · 2011-09-15 00:42:55

Sounds like I have nothing to worry, thank you guys for the quick responses.

I don't even open my question marks in Spanish... hehe, but I guess my blood got the best of me here (:

<question> My mind must think like this by now </question>

MrCode · 2011-09-15 01:31:27

+1 for compatibility. I have encountered things I wouldn't run because they require multilib, and I want to keep my lappy pure 64-bit (namely a 32-bit-only printer driver), but for the most part every application I've ever used/installed on my system has had a 64-bit version available.

Plus which, if you're building from the AUR, then it's built for your target architecture anyway…

stryder · 2011-09-15 04:03:59

Since you're prepared to use virtualbox you can easily have a 32bit arch as a virtual machine.

Cloudef · 2011-09-15 05:31:27

You can also use chroot (it's not truly visualized, but should really work for everything.), but heck? I've been running 64bit linux distros including arch for years with no problems. The only problem application I can think of is PCSX2.

cybertorture · 2011-09-15 06:58:25

Hello denn1s,
Collect one more vote for x86_64 ARCH.
Personaly i use it on any PC i got that support "LM" tag . As for LAMP it really seems to work even better than i686 ( well i guess that you have 3GB or more RAM ).
Cheers and try it out... you will never regret it

denn1s · 2011-09-15 18:00:26

Thank you again, it's a really nice community, I'll give it a go once I get my new system setup. I guess things really do change fast, since the last time I tried left me a bit of a trauma.

ChojinDSL · 2011-09-22 13:49:37

Keep in mind that 64bit is capable of running 32bit code. Thanks to multilib and such. You can always selectively choose to install a certain app as 32bit. Or even run a complete 32bit chroot.

My guess is, you will have waaaay more apps running in 64bit than in 32bit only. So it seems backwards to run a 32bit environment for just a few individual apps.

Besides, with 32bit, apart from the RAM issue, there are certain limitations that tend to creep up unexpectedly.

Just as an example:
I was hired to eventually replace a linux sysadmin which the company I work for was unhappy with.
One of the servers runs ffmpeg to automatically convert Videos into other formats. Well thanks to some obscure wmv codec which is not available in 64bit ffmpeg, this guy chose to install the ENTIRE server as 32bit running a PAE Kernel.

Now this server has 24GB of ram and I think, 8 cores. Either way, definetely the kind of machine you want to run with 64bit. But no, because of one stupid little program, and because he apparently thought that running a 32bit chroot would be too "complicated", he installed the whole server with 32bit.

I then demonstrated him a working parallel installation of 64bit and 32bit ffmpeg on my 64bit Desktop, which only took 10 minutes to install. Thats including reading some documentation.

The only case that I can think of, that might require you to stay with 32bit, is if you have some essential hardware, for which no 64bit driver exists, and you need direct access to the hardware. However, that would probably have to be a proprietary driver for some very obscure hardware.

lilsirecho · 2011-09-22 14:43:05

Be aware that many users are experiencing slow downs in usb transfers with 64bit systems and multi-core mobos and this affects more than archlinux. This is an ongoing problem not yet solved for about three years.

nixpunk · 2011-09-23 03:15:03

lifeafter2am wrote:

I have, literally, yet to find something I can't run.

Same here. I'm running x64 on both my server and my laptop and can't complain.

Awebb · 2011-09-23 07:05:46

I once had trouble running an old game using too much assembler and I had a sleepless night installing a few game console compilers, but that was mostly AUR stuff that probably only needs some tinkering.

Pajaro · 2011-09-23 08:24:45

I miss an application: wineasio for 64 bit wine.

.:B:. · 2011-09-23 10:41:57

I have only used Wine with a few apps so far on x86_64, and I never had a 32 bit install on this setup, so I can't tell if it works fine. The one game I installed with it though that was supposed to be working with Wine didn't work, but as I said, I can't compare.

Yannick_LM · 2011-09-23 19:15:30

I use a arch 64 at work, and write stuff that is supposed to work on ubuntu 32...

Answer is easy: debootstrap + schroot.

May seem hard to get right the first time, but there are plenty of tutos everywhere ....

Note: If you compile a lot of code, going to 64 is really nice: compiling is much, much faster.

Mr.Elendig · 2011-09-23 19:17:11

relevant

Arch Linux

#1 2011-09-15 00:06:16

Question for 64 bit users

#2 2011-09-15 00:10:02

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#3 2011-09-15 00:28:03

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#4 2011-09-15 00:42:32

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#5 2011-09-15 00:42:35

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#6 2011-09-15 00:42:55

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#7 2011-09-15 01:31:27

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#8 2011-09-15 04:03:59

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#9 2011-09-15 05:31:27

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#10 2011-09-15 06:58:25

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#11 2011-09-15 18:00:26

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#12 2011-09-22 13:49:37

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#13 2011-09-22 14:43:05

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#14 2011-09-23 03:15:03

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#15 2011-09-23 07:05:46

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#16 2011-09-23 08:24:45

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#17 2011-09-23 10:41:57

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#18 2011-09-23 19:15:30

Re: Question for 64 bit users

#19 2011-09-23 19:17:11

Re: Question for 64 bit users

Board footer