LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Fedora
User Name
Password
Fedora This forum is for the discussion of the Fedora Project.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 11-01-2006, 05:15 PM   #1
sancho
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Distribution: Ubuntu 9.04/9.10 (64-bit)
Posts: 149

Rep: Reputation: 15
32-bit version of every 64-bit package on system?


Subject pretty much says all.

I've run yumex and noticed that there's two copies of nearly every update available for the system. At a glance, I'm seeing both a 32-bit and 64-bit version for evolution, evolution-data-server, and gkhtml3.

I know there should be a 32-bit version for some packages, but why would I need two versions of, say, Evolution?
 
Old 11-01-2006, 05:21 PM   #2
PatrickNew
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Charleston, SC, USA
Distribution: Debian, Gentoo, Ubuntu, RHEL
Posts: 1,148
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 48
The quick answer is that you don't. I use a 64 bit computer, so I get (modest) performance boosts from using 64 bit software, hence the 64 bit version. On my second computer, however, I only have a 32 bit processor, so it cannot run 64 bit software, so for it I need the 32 bit.

We could all get by using only 32 bit, but the 64 is there for people who can take advantage of it. You really should only use one on any given computer.
 
Old 11-01-2006, 05:29 PM   #3
sancho
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Distribution: Ubuntu 9.04/9.10 (64-bit)
Posts: 149

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Yeah that's exactly the thinking behind using the 64-bit distro--that's why I installed it.

Yet, I'm not the one putting the 32-bit packages on there. They're there by default, and that's what's bothersome.
 
Old 11-01-2006, 10:39 PM   #4
PatrickNew
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Charleston, SC, USA
Distribution: Debian, Gentoo, Ubuntu, RHEL
Posts: 1,148
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 48
Oh, I think I understand your question now. You just mean, why do they mix the two together in the repositories? Well, some packages are only available in x86 and not x86_64, and other I guess they just don't want to duplicate where they host the files. By default, yum installs the packages which match your architecture.
 
Old 11-01-2006, 11:42 PM   #5
sancho
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Distribution: Ubuntu 9.04/9.10 (64-bit)
Posts: 149

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Wellll... close.

Mainly, the question is: Why have a 32-bit package on my system if the the 64-bit package does everything the 32-bit does?

For packages like Firefox where some plugins require a 32-bit Firefox, it's obvious why I would want a 32-bit version of Firefox on my system.

But, for most other packages, what's the point? What is a 32-bit version of Evolution going to do that the 64-bit one won't? Why waste my hard drive space with that--and then waste bandwidth on updating both versions of the program?

It seems that the only 32-bit packages I should need are those which require/depend on programs/drivers for which there are no 64-bit alternatives.

(BTW: I don't think 32-bit and 64-bit packages are mixed in the same repos; I'm pretty sure each get their own, right?)
 
Old 11-02-2006, 08:23 AM   #6
PatrickNew
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Charleston, SC, USA
Distribution: Debian, Gentoo, Ubuntu, RHEL
Posts: 1,148
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 48
You're saying you have redundant packages installed on the same computer? I'm relatively sure that that's a bad idea, and ought to be fixed.
 
Old 11-02-2006, 08:35 AM   #7
sancho
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Distribution: Ubuntu 9.04/9.10 (64-bit)
Posts: 149

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Yep, there are plenty of redundant packages, and this is on a fresh install.

So, how much of that is normal?
 
Old 11-02-2006, 08:46 AM   #8
PatrickNew
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Charleston, SC, USA
Distribution: Debian, Gentoo, Ubuntu, RHEL
Posts: 1,148
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 48
Well, someone more experienced than I should chime in, but I generally believe that if you have two architectures of the same package on your system, something unintended has happened, and those packages may conflict. Can you give me the command you used to find this out?
 
Old 11-04-2006, 08:54 AM   #9
borgware
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: Arizona
Distribution: Ubuntu 7.04
Posts: 24

Rep: Reputation: 15
That's it. I'm leaving Fedora forever. FC5 had a chance but since then it's just becoming uberbloated shit.

Whatta waste of time.
 
Old 11-05-2006, 12:07 AM   #10
PatrickNew
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Charleston, SC, USA
Distribution: Debian, Gentoo, Ubuntu, RHEL
Posts: 1,148
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 48
I wouldn't call it a waste of time, I rather like it. Maybe it's not for you, but it has its merits.
 
Old 11-05-2006, 01:24 AM   #11
cs-cam
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Australia
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 3,544
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 56
For somethings you need both the 32bit and 64bit package installed. Example, you want to run a 64bit Xorg so you have all the x86_64 Xorg packages installed _but_ you also want to play Enemy Territory. ET is a 32bit-only game so for it to run, it needs 32bit glibc, ALSA/OSS, all Xorg packages it uses (which would be a few).

Right there is probably 100MB of 32bit packages for a single game, the Fedora distro is aimed at newbies who never have to worry about stuff like this so they would by default install a lot of redundant packages just to cover the possibly clueless end user so everything they could possibly install works. If this isn't your cup of tea then borgware is right, find a new distro. There are plenty out there that are strictly 64bit that would probably suit your needs.
 
Old 08-05-2008, 08:58 AM   #12
reine
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2008
Location: Nantes-France
Distribution: ubuntu hardy on a HP Pavillion N5442 P3 933MHz 621.7MiB +ADSL i love debian too (deb rulez!)
Posts: 18

Rep: Reputation: 0
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickNew View Post
The quick answer is that you don't. I use a 64 bit computer, so I get (modest) performance boosts from using 64 bit software, hence the 64 bit version. On my second computer, however, I only have a 32 bit processor, so it cannot run 64 bit software, so for it I need the 32 bit.

We could all get by using only 32 bit, but the 64 is there for people who can take advantage of it. You really should only use one on any given computer.
for the headache: you can heal the free one, but you can't heal the $200 one (apart from hard chemiotherapy!). Reine.

Last edited by reine; 08-05-2008 at 09:00 AM. Reason: the $ sign was, i think, misplaced.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
stupid q: how to determine version 64-bit or 32-bit? noknow Linux - Software 29 09-28-2012 04:53 AM
How to install 32-bit version of libXp on x86_64 system (FC5) srosburg Fedora 3 08-23-2006 01:44 PM
Getting Konqueror to load 32 bit plugins on a 64 bit system slantoflight Linux - Software 1 05-28-2006 05:17 PM
How does the 64 bit version handle interacting with 32 bit programs? purelithium Mandriva 1 11-13-2005 05:16 PM
Which version of 32 bit redhat will install on IBM xSeries 366 (64 bit)? Hello123 Linux - Hardware 2 09-14-2005 05:50 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:43 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration