Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 12:29 -0400, randy cole wrote: > Jarod Wilson wrote: > > Oh, and you can now have both kernel-i686 and kernel-x86_64 of the same > > version-release installed simultaneously, if you're crazy like > > that... :) > Jarod, > Is the only difference between 64-bit and 32-bit installations the > kernel? I have a 32-bit installed but want to run the 64 bit. That > would save me a partition & reinstalling :-) Plus, it's on an > external usb and I could plug it into 32 or 64 bit machines! Its possible to run a 64-bit kernel with an (almost entirely?) 32-bit userland, but I've never actually done it myself. Typically, a 64-bit x86_64 install is predominantly 64-bit userland (juxtaposed to a 64-bit powerpc install, where userland is predominantly 32-bit, because ppc32 has a sane register space, unlike 32-bit x86, so the increased memory footprint isn't offset by any performance gains...). So no, there's quite a bit of difference between a typical 32-bit x86 install and a typical 64-bit x86_64 install, but it *is* possible to shoehorn a 64-bit kernel on top of a 32-bit install and make things work. -- Jarod Wilson [hidden email] -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |