WelcomeWelcome | FAQFAQ | DownloadsDownloads | WikiWiki

Author Topic: Justification for using 64B ?  (Read 518 times)

Offline labeas

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
Justification for using 64B ?
« on: April 25, 2019, 07:43:57 PM »
I hope I can get an objective opinion from this group.
-> uname -a ==
Linux box 4.2.9-tinycore64 #1999 SMP Mon Jan 18 19:59:34 UTC 2016 x86_64 GNU/Linux

So, the latest version is 10? I'm deliberately not a "fad chaser",
and can't afford the time to update and TUNE the system,
because I'm busy USING it.
  Also my most usefull app is wily: dating from the 90s!
No it's not an editor, any more than emacs is !
I only chose to install TC64 because of panic/confusion after my PCs
were stolen, and I needed to get a laptop to be mobile (for possible
fast flee from this "Trump-shit-hole Africa location").
Somehow I believed that I needed a 64Bit installation to handle the
available 3G-dongle/S.
   Since some of my apps which I need access to, need 32bit, I was
considering installing <TC32>. Which one should I select?
Can it install from the same USB-stik as this TC64;
ie, with just an extra entry in the relevant syslinux-file?

==TIA


Offline andyj

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
Re: Justification for using 64B ?
« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2019, 07:57:08 PM »
Any choice of bitness or even distro for that matter should in part at least be driven by the end goal: What is it you want to do with your computer? Tell us that, and maybe we could be more helpful.

Offline Juanito

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11115
Re: Justification for using 64B ?
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2019, 10:32:55 PM »
Since some of my apps which I need access to, need 32bit, I was
considering installing <TC32>. Which one should I select?
Can it install from the same USB-stik as this TC64;
ie, with just an extra entry in the relevant syslinux-file?

Yes, you can install more than one version of tc from the same usb stick using an additional boot loader menu entry.

If you are looking to use 32-bit prebuilt binaries, then maybe dCore would be better for you. If you are looking to use a 32-bit extension that does not exist in the 64-bit tc repo, then just request it.

Offline core-user

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
  • Linux since 1999
Re: Justification for using 64B ?
« Reply #3 on: April 26, 2019, 01:52:42 AM »
A 64bit computer can run either 64 or 32 bit systems, so if you need to have the use of a 32bit app, put the 32bit distro on it.
AMD, ARM, & Intel.

Offline jazzbiker

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 138
Re: Justification for using 64B ?
« Reply #4 on: April 26, 2019, 04:01:15 AM »
A 64bit computer can run either 64 or 32 bit systems, so if you need to have the use of a 32bit app, put the 32bit distro on it.
Of course 64-bit system will run 32-bit code, but modules can be arch-dependant (probably bus-width-dependant hardware or smth of that kind), as i can conclude from my experience.
I've made grub2 dual-boot flash according to  Juanito reciept http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,19364.msg119228.html#msg119228
except /boot is seperate partition, and placed both 32 and 64 vmlinuz-es, module-s and rootfs-es into /boot and made boot choices of
(vmlinuz+modules+rootfs)
(vmlinuz64+modules64+rootfs)
(vmlinuz64+modules64+rootfs64)
I work with three boxes, two are intels 32-bit and one amd 64-bit, all laptops. And if i try to load pure 32-bit version on my amd64 box and load graphics-x.xx-xx-#KERNEL i've got hang up. While (vmlinuz64+modules64+rootfs) loads graphics and works well.
So in my opinion 64-bit box needs 64-bit kernel and modules and 32-bit rootfs to run 32-bit applications.