I briefly defected to X86-64 (slamd64), but I moved back pretty sharpish. Not only do you have a system that is part 64 bit part 32 bit, but the security updates run a bit behind the Slackware updates. Also there is no real speed difference, so I found, that for me, there was no point moving.

See you back soon.

samac

Slamd64 is fred's side project, a hobby, not a full time thing.

You'll be back:-)

Like noone has ever had a demand for memory beyond 640 kByte...

gargamel

Isn't BlueWhite64 pretty much Slackware packages recompiled for 64 bit? (no flames, I know it or Slamd64 is but don't use either) In which case there shouldn't be an issue switching since it should be the same experience surely?

I'm not sure if that's literally true, but their goal is to provide the same user experience. According to the info here:

ahem "See you back soon." sooner than you think LOL. alas enough horse poo has driven me back promptly.

the debian repos were enough to send me back. what a waste of a day... i was like "yay, compiz 2.2" LOL i thought it was a typo.

i dont know the 64 support for packages is simply not there.

something was messed up with my frame rates on the 64 also, my frames in some spots were faster, but in a few others slower?!? i mean i just built this computer, and the processor speed is nearly double of the previous. the video board is like 10 times better than the previous.

ill take my face melting slackware 386 software thanks. nothing like dos 5 speed on a ghz rated proc =D

Not once did you explain why you need a 64bit OS so badly. All you seem to do is try to get debian to function like Slackware which is an impossible task.
Did you actually do speed tests to verify that Slackware runs like old DOS on your fast box? Is it so much slower than 64bit Debian? If so... what percentage?

Is there an application you run that needs the > 4GB of RAM, and/or 64bit registers, which crawls on Slackware and screams on 64bit?

Just curious.

Eric

Isn't that the truth. One day I'll learn.

what im saying by the dos comment is that its very light weight and runs very very fast. i did no speed tests, besides some screen savers that display fps. i dont NEED a 64 bit os, i knew that i was switching my drive configuration around and that the drive was going to get wiped. while it got wiped it also got support for 64 in the process, but the lack of decent flash and java was a problem. also the lack of browsers was a problem. i like having more than iceweasel for a web browser.

i was saying debian amd64 was not much faster than slackware was on my box that was half of the speed, so i switched back to get things going. i bet in 5 hours i can set slackware to support more than i could on debian in 15 hours, even with apt-get and synaptic. i need to change my tag to 12.2 now =)

i mean out of the box, debian was missing gcc g++ cmake automake autoconf glib glibc python perl binutils pkgtool and others.

It is, you can compare the SlackBuilds scripts .

If you or other don't believe, I suggest to install SW and BW64 to a spare HDD or in to a VM and make the diff. Enjoy .

@ninja master: The word "official" is useless if the distribution is doing what you expect to do. The only way is to find this, is to try it, test it, set up services that you need, run programs that you use day to day.

Since flash (alpha) and java(beta) has been out for 64-bit, you only have to compile your favorite program(s).