[lug] Daily system crash....

[David Morris]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 07:29:06PM -0700, David L. Anselmi wrote:
> David Morris wrote:
> [...]
>> I did realize another variable which changed about the time
>> I first noticed the problem:  I started connecting to a VPN
>> using the Cisco VPN client.  I have no clue if the problem
>> started before or after I first connected the VPN, but it
>> was near the same time.  Of course, it was also about the
>> same time that I started using the system as a development
>> platform on a regular basis, so again it could just be
>> coincidence.
>
> Does Cisco's client muck with the IP stack the way it used to on  
> Windows?  (If it does, would that be a kernel module, or something  
> else?)  If it's running in kernel space I'd guess that to be the problem.

It does have a kernel module that it compiles.  No clue the
content is, but that is exactly the reason it occurred to me
to suspect the cisco vpn client.  I have not, however, found
any reports of other people having problems with it (not
that there are a lot of them).

I actually found a better choice than even openswan:  vpnc.
It is designed to be an open source replacement to the cisco
linux client and is available as a debian package.

>> I've wanted to re-install Debian as the x86 architecture as
>> I wanted to re-partition a hard disk and also found 64-bit
>> just makes life annoying as I still need 32-bit debian
>> installed for a variety of reasons....and don't make use of
>> anything 64-bit provides.
>
> What reasons?  I'm using 64 bit and don't have any reasons
> to use 32 (I  thought Acrobat Reader might be, but it
> isn't).

Two of the reasons aren't related to 32/64 bit issues:
- I needed a larger root partition
- I stupidly installed gnome on the original 64-bit install
  and, as I don't use it, it has caused me grief ever since.

As for 64-bit related issues:
- No java in web browsers (need a 32-bit browser)
- No flash in web browsers (again, need 32-bit)
- I have some 32-bit binary applications which only work in
  a 32-bit schroot environment.
- 64-bit applications use more hard disk space and I am
  short on that for my Linux install (yes I do have huge
  hard disks, almost all of which are allocated to Windows
  and the countless gigabytes games require to install)
- 64-bit applications use more RAM
- I can still use a 64-bit kernel (-amd64) in a 32-bit user
  space and bypass all the above annoyances
- Using a 64-bit kernel (-amd64) I can run 64-bit
  applications in a 32-bit user space (this is important as
  I do a lot of 64-bit development)
- Using debian testing, I get a steady stream of broken
  packages on the AMD64 architecture, on occasion causing
  severe problems (crashing applications).

Overall, there is absolutely no benefit to using the AMD64
architecture for what I use the system for.  By switching
over to AMD64 I get a bit more hard disk space, a bit more
usable RAM, fewer annoyances (the x86 schroot is a pain to
deal with), and hopefully mores table packages (because more
people use x86 than AMD64).

I admit I'm not completely familiar with what is lost by
running a 64-bit kernel and 32-bit user space, however I am
certain that my needs don't even come close to requiring
both being 64-bit.

So in the end using 32-bit user space simply makes my life a
lot simpler.

--David