[lug] linux desktop/laptop @ 64bit

[scott.herod at comcast.net]

----- Davide Del Vento <davide.del.vento at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I used to have a linux desktop with a 64-bit installation years ago
> (when x86_64 were just out) and it worked fine, mostly because it
> actually was a fine dual-library with lib (32bits) and lib64.
> Has anybody tried a 64-bit installation nowadays? My understanding is
> that they do pure 64-bit now, not mixed ones anymore (why?)
> Is there any problem (the usual suspect are the proprietary binaries
> such as Flash plugin for firefox, Chrome browser, etc)?
> The reason for going 64-bit is to have more than 4GB of memory, but
> still being a user-facing machine (not server) I'd like to have the
> convenience of a fully-fledged system (yes, flash is off 99% of the
> times, thanks to noscript, but that 1% is needed)
> Any suggestions or recommendations welcome!
> Thanks,
> Davide

Hello Davide,

I have avoided installing things when there is no 64-bit flavor available.
I did a quick check of my RPM database and it looks like I only installed
SDL in 32-bit and that was probably due to clicking too wildly in yumex.

I've also got flashplayer which I usually have turned off but it is also
available in 64-bit now.

One thing that I recently declined to install was skype, which is available
only in 32-bit last time I checked.  There was some google utility that
I also recently declined to add for the same reason, but I can't recall
what it was now.

Oh, my base install is currently fedora 14.

Scott