have I jumped the slackware ship by installing BlueWhite-64
 

bluewhite-64 is a 64 bit build of slackware
it is the exact same in every thing as slack
the /etc files are the same
slackbuild scripts work almost the same execpt the output
packages run on 64 bit computers insted of 32 bit computers
the same nonstandard file placements for mozilla
even down to the X server bug when coming back to X after a terminal with ncurses on it like midnight commander
BUT
it makes this computer 2 to 3 times faster

So have I jumped the slackware ship ?

Is there a question here?

BW64 is just Slackware compiled for 64 bit processors, a function which is supported in the official Slackbuilds used to compile the standard 32 bit version of Slackware. So it isn't really any different.

You are on a cheap copy of the Slackware ship.

Slamd64 took the Slackware sources and ported it to x86_64. The files
even say Slackware rather than Slamd64 in many places.

Bluewhite64 took the sources of Slamd64, removed multilib support and
released the resulting packages as Bluewhite64.

So what are you running? It's been called a parasite in another LQ thread.
Neither are true forks of Slackware, such as SuSE, because they just
rebrand Slackware as it's released.

Pat Volkerding and the core team at Slackware do the hard work on the distro,
and these other fellows take that work and modify it to make "their distro."

Okay, then you're obligated to post some benchmarks to prove this. Or else,
we'll think you're just silly and confused. :D

I tried BlueWhite64, but it lacked certain 32 bit add ins that I needed, so I tried Slamd64 with multilib support, and found it better but still hard work (try getting java support in firefox) and security updates are sloooooowww. Finally I am back with good old 32 bit Slackware 12.1.

So you haven't jumped ship, you have just fallen overboard for a while, we look forward to helping you climb back on soon.

On a more serious note, we do need an official 64 bit Slackware, because most hardware being made now is 64 bit and that will only increase in the future.

samac

For the record, Fred Emmmott, the maintainer of Slamd64 at least considered with friendliness by the Slackware team, or at least, they seem to get along well at the KDE release event.
So even if Slamd64 is not an official Slackware version, I tend to believe it's going to be the basis for an official port in the future.
As for the 2 or 3 times, faster, well..... I mean do we look that stupid around here?

Proof of this claim would be nice.

Just read http://www.linux.com/feature/132875 , the Bluewhite64 creators interview.
Although it was meant to promote "his" distro, it had the exact opposite effect on me.
Even though i dont need multilib i stick with Slamd64.

I use Slackware and Slamd64. Won't touch BlueBlack.

Interesting. Why? Have you experienced some show-stopping bugs with BlueWhite-64?

Never used it due to 'historical' reasons.

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ckware-573930/

I think a detailed look at just what CPU is envloved in these bench marks
is in order

I got this from a program called hard info

now lets see how this compares to other CPUs higher is better

If you will look it's running a little faster than a Intel Pentium 4 CPU 3.60GHz witch is running at almost twice as fast
dude this is a cellron
I'm tiered of cleaning up the out put so the next bench mark is raw output from the program

Results in seconds lower is better
this CPU should not be able to out perform the CPUs that it has out performed
the only way I can explain it's performance is that the better CPUs running at twice it's speed that It out performed were running in 32bit mode this one was running in 64bit mode

I Mucked up during the install and wiped out my official slackware install so the numbers I had on it were destroyed along with the file system

the forum hick-uped and I double posted this so I did a drastic edit

The more likely explanation is that the benchmark results are just broken. Benchmarks are pretty tricky even under controlled circumstances. You have to be very careful not to contaminate the results.


What would have been interesting to see would have been:
32bit Slackware, running benchmark on your machine after a clean boot
V
64bit BW, running benchmark on the same machine after a clean boot.

I'm afraid all the other results you posted are just noise.

And in both cases, CPU frequency scaling should be either turned off, or set to the "performance" governor.

it's a laptop the CPU has clock cycle dropping built in to it
the bench marks very according to the temperature the the warmer it gets the slower it runs
the times posted were the slowest I have seen so far I was setting in a hot car in the sun when I ran those bench marks
running the computer on an inverter I think APCI slows the computer down when on the battery so I use the inverter when I can