[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GUB on kainhofer: still cross/gcc
From: |
Jan Nieuwenhuizen |
Subject: |
Re: GUB on kainhofer: still cross/gcc |
Date: |
Sat, 06 Jun 2009 10:52:21 +0200 |
Op vrijdag 05-06-2009 om 23:05 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Anthony W.
Youngman:
Hi Anthony,
> >> >I think that's a pretty usual setup (most people I know have a 32bit
> >> >version
> >> >of Linux installed on their laptop even though their CPU is actually
> >> >64bit).
> >
> >Sometimes it makes sense to "do what most people do", esp. if you do it
> >as a deliberate choice :-)
>
> Just as long as you're aware of the consequences ... "what most people
> do" is usually a pretty stupid thing to do. Following the herd is fine
> if you don't want to stand out, but if you want to make your mark it's
> not an option.
Yup, that's exactly what I say: consider running 64 bits, even though
running 32 bits is what most people do. Is it really necessary to
paraphrase that?
> >> Note also, that running 32-bit on a 64-bit system can OFTEN be a
> >> performance WIN, so you DON'T want to upgrade "just because you can".
> >
> >I call BS. Ref please?
>
> Are you saying that 64-bit code is *inherently* more efficient than
> 32-bit on a 64-bit system?
What I'm trying to say is: please do not spread unsupported rumours,
even if they give you a warm fuzzy feeling.
You state that
> running 32-bit on a 64-bit system can OFTEN be a performance WIN
but when asked for a reference, you say
> I can't give an actual reference, I'm afraid
...which makes it a rumour. Please try not to spread rumours,
that does not help anyone :-)
Greetings,
Jan.
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
AvatarĀ®: http://AvatarAcademy.nl | http://lilypond.org
- Re: GUB on kainhofer: still cross/gcc, (continued)
Re: GUB on kainhofer: still cross/gcc, Graham Percival, 2009/06/01
Re: GUB on kainhofer: still cross/gcc, Graham Percival, 2009/06/01
Re: GUB on kainhofer: still cross/gcc, Anthony W. Youngman, 2009/06/04