| 1 |
Mark Knecht wrote: |
| 2 |
> 2010/12/9 Mateusz Arkadiusz Mierzwinski<mateuszmierzwinski@×××××.com>: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> Dale, I tell You one thing - choose multilib. This don't do nothing wrong. |
| 5 |
>> You can use 32-bit app compatibility and this don't reduce performance of |
| 6 |
>> overall system. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
> Agreed. I think the only downside is _slightly_ slower emerge times |
| 9 |
> which with modern processors like Dale is going to use shouldn't be |
| 10 |
> much of an issue at all. I don't know of any other negative side |
| 11 |
> effects. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Cheers, |
| 14 |
> Mark |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Again, things are in flux here. You folks may have to look at time |
| 19 |
stamps to see where my brain is at any given point. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
It sounds like I need to go multilib for now and when everything gets |
| 22 |
sorted out for pure 64 bit, then switch to pure 64. I say this because |
| 23 |
I can switch from mulitlib to no-multilib without reinstalling. The |
| 24 |
reverse is not the case and requires a re-install. Correct? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I'm glad I came on here and asked questions now. O_O |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Dale |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
:-) :-) |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
P. S. I got more replies to read. Watch me change my mind again. lol |
Archives