2006/3/2, Rudolf Kastl <che666@xxxxxxxxx>: > 2006/3/2, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx>: > > On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 10:47, Rudolf Kastl wrote: > > > 2006/3/2, Ralph.Grothe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <Ralph.Grothe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > > > > Can you tell the rest of us what we are missing by running > > > > > a 32-bit browser or is the difference just indescribable? > > > > > > > > > > you are pulling in 32 bit libs which eat up ram... > > > > Oh, so the reason you like 64-bit is that the libs use > > less ram? That's the first I've heard that... > > > > if i load a 64 bit library... and have to load the 32 bit one aswell > cause i need the backwards stuff i waste ram for the 32 bit lib ;). since i fear you dont get it again i am going to explain by example rather lets take a browser that uses the gtk library... lots of desktop apps i use need the 64 bit version... now a 32 bit browser like e.g. galeon needs 32bit gtk... so both are loaded... loading one lib 2 times is overhead in my eyes that is avoidable and proprietary stuff again is anyways just a workaround not a solution. disagree again? ;) > > > > and then again why are you using 64 bit fedora at all if you dont like > > > the 64 bit fuss? ;) > > > > Because it still runs all the old stuff unchanged. > > > > > backwards compat is nice but personally i prefer fixes instead of > > > workarounds, just a matter of attitude. > > > > > > just curious... > > > > You are asking many people to do a lot of work to > > build/test/maintain/distribute additional versions. I'd > > just like to know what to expect to see in return for > > that extra work. > > actually a real solution wouldnt need much more than a rebuild ;). > > > > > -- > > Les Mikesell > > lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx > > > > > > -- > > fedora-list mailing list > > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list > > >
