| 1 |
On Friday 10 February 2006 01:35, Thierry de Coulon wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> - for what I'd like to do with video (ripping and converting DVDs and DV |
| 5 |
> processing) 64 bit software is not ready: I did not check directly if |
| 6 |
> transcode works, |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
well, it should. At least I have it installed. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> but DVDRip would not start. Cinelerra didn't install |
| 11 |
> either, only kino worked - and MainActor is still 32 bit, if it works at |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
wgich should all work with the 32 bit emul libs. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> all. - regarding audio, 64bit is not an issue. Ripping the CD allready took |
| 16 |
> more time than converting to ogg on my dual Athlon. |
| 17 |
> - standard desktop applications, as far as I am concerned, heavily rely on |
| 18 |
> OpenOffice.org and that is still 32 bit |
| 19 |
> - gaming also requires 32bit |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
no it does not |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
ut2004 for example is available in a 64bit version. |
| 24 |
And even if not, it would work with the emul-libs. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> So I am thinking that a 32bit Gentoo is the way to go. I may switch to |
| 28 |
> 64bit later, when it really (?) brings something |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
It does bring something today: |
| 31 |
8 more registers. |
| 32 |
And for encoding stuff, it should make a difference. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> Does anyone have other arguments to justify the troubles of working with a |
| 35 |
> 64bit install at the moment? |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
there are no troubles? |
| 39 |
Only if you need flash and or the win32codec package, you have to install |
| 40 |
firefox-bin and mplayer-bin. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
And since it does not make sense to compile firefox, it does not hurt. |
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives