[SOLVED]should I go for 64bit version of Fedora 11 ?

[Aioanei Rares]

On 11/03/2009 02:16 PM, Jatin K wrote:
> On 11/03/2009 03:58 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
>> On 11/03/2009 12:15 PM, Jatin K wrote:
>>> On 11/03/2009 02:55 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
>>>> On 11/03/2009 11:15 AM, Jatin K wrote:
>>>>> On 11/03/2009 01:34 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/03/2009 09:38 AM, Jatin K wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear all
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've purchased a new Dell laptop Vostro 1520, major 
>>>>>>> configuration[1] , My question is should I go for FC 11 64bit 
>>>>>>> version ? is there any significant benefit if I use 64bit version ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>> Model :- Dell Vostro 1520 P-series
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Processor:- Intel Core 2 Duo 2.53 P8700 1066Mhz FSB ( Intel VT 
>>>>>>> enabled )
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> RAM :- 3GB DDR2 800Mhz
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Graphics :- Mobile Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator X4500M
>>>
>> My thinking is it's not safe to decide on what you've heard. Flash 
>> works like a charm on all my 64-bit systems; and what is that "other 
>> software" are you referring to? 64-bit Linux has also 32-bit libs if 
>> needed.
>>
> Ok , I have find this [a] by googling
>
> [a]
> ---------------------------
>
> For 64-bit Ubuntu, finding the proper 32-bit support packages is a 
> simple matter of opening up the Synaptic Package Manager, and 
> searching for the string “ia32”. With 64-bit openSuSE, 32-bit support 
> is already built-in, so you don’t have to do anything. With Fedora, 
> though, it’s a whole different story. Not only are the 32-bit packages 
> not already installed, the Fedora folk don’t provide any documentation 
> on how to install them. The directions I found via Google were 
> outdated, and wouldn’t work. I finally resolved the problem by asking 
> a Red Hat employee in my local Linux Users Group.
>
> *Add an “rpm” Macro*
>
> This isn’t an absolute necessity, but it’s handy. Add the following 
> line to the “/etc/rpm/macros” file:
>
> %_query_all_fmt %%{name}-%%{version}-%%{release}.%%{arch}
>
> Now, when you query for information about rpm packages, you’ll be able 
> to see whether they’re 32-bit or 64-bit packages.
>
> sudo rpm -q SDL
> SDL-1.2.13-9.fc11.x86_64
>
> *Add the Libraries*
>
> Next, add the 32-bit libraries by copying the following list, and 
> pasting it into a text file. Save it as “Fedora-ia32.txt”.
>
> arts.i586
> audiofile.i586
> bzip2-libs.i586
> cairo.i586
> compat-expat1-1.95.8-4.i586
> compat-libstdc++-33-3.2.3-63.i586
> compiz.i586
> cyrus-sasl-lib.i586
> dbus-libs.i586
> directfb.i586
> esound-libs.i586
> fltk.i586
> freeglut.i586
> gphoto2.i586
> gtk2.i586
> hal-libs.i586
> imlib.i586
> jack-audio-connection-kit.1.i586
> java.i586
> lcms-libs.i586
> lesstif.i586
> libacl.i586
> libaio-0.3.106-4.2.i586
> libao.i586
> libattr.i586
> libcap.i586
> libdrm.i586
> libexif.i586
> libgcrypt-1.4.0-3.i586
> libgnomecanvas.i586
> libICE.i586
> libieee1284.i586
> libsigc++20.i586
> libSM.i586
> libtool-ltdl.i586
> libusb.i586
> libwmf.i586
> libwmf-lite.i586
> libX11.i586
> libXau.i586
> libXaw.i586
> libXcomposite.i586
> libXdamage.i586
> libXdmcp.i586
> libXext.i586
> libXfixes.i586
> libxkbfile.i586
> libxml2.i586
> libXmu.i586
> libXp.i586
> libXpm.i586
> libXScrnSaver.i586
> libxslt.i586
> libXt.i586
> libXTrap.i586
> libXtst.i586
> libXv.i586
> libXxf86vm.i586
> lzo.i586
> mesa-libGL.i586
> mesa-libGLU.i586
> nas-libs.i586
> nss_ldap.i586
> opencdk.i586
> openldap.i586
> pam.i586
> popt.i586
> pulseaudio-libs.i586
> sane-backends-libs-gphoto2.i586
> sane-backends-libs.i586
> SDL.i586
> svgalib.i586
> unixODBC.i586
> zlib.i586
>
> Finally, “su” to a root shell, and run the following command:
>
> # for i in $(< Fedora-ia32.txt ); do yum -y install $i; done
>
> When the process completes, you can verify that you have both 32-bit 
> and 64-bit packages installed.
>
> sudo rpm -q SDL
> SDL-1.2.13-9.fc11.x86_64
> SDL-1.2.13-9.fc11.i586
>
> *A Caveat*
>
> By having to use the entire package name, all the way up through the 
> arch designation, we open ourselves up to a slight problem. That is, 
> package version numbers are also part of the package names. So, by the 
> time you read this, the script may have been partially broken due to 
> Fedora packages having been updated to newer versions. Here’s the way 
> around that.
>
> Go ahead and do the procedure as written. Then, as root, run the 
> following command:
>
> for i in $(< Fedora-ia32.txt ); do rpm -q >> rpm_results.txt $i; done
>
> If package versions have changed, you’ll see a “not installed” error 
> message for it in the output file. Then, you can open Yum Extender, 
> and search for the update version to install.
> *Conclusion*
>
> The reason that the directions that I found via Google didn’t work, is 
> that the package list referenced the “i386” packages that were part of 
> Fedora 10. With Fedora 11, the “i386” packages have been replaced by 
> “i586” packages
>
>
Well, what do you know? How about yum search SDL | grep i586 or sudo yum 
install yumex ? :)