[Fwd: Re: What to install on an amd64 machine?]

[Robert L Cochran]

Well, I downloaded this from Sun several weeks ago and unrolled it in my

home directory without installing it system-wide because I was trying to 
figure out how to build a jpackage.org-style binary RPM that would 
install it. I ran into a problem, posted a query for help to their 
newsgroup, but never got a reply. I should have spent more time on it I 
suppose. One thing I don't understand is why the jpackage people feel 
the Sun installer installs Sun Java incorrectly -- or to put it another 
way, why should I want to prefer the jpackage.org packages over the 
standard Sun installation? After a little looking around on the jpackage 
website, and noting the extremely low support for 64 bit Java packages, 
another question quickly emerges: why should I wait for jpackage.org to 
get around to putting 64 bit packages together, when Sun already offers 
one I can install at this moment?

But then again, I could have persisted in twiddling with 1.5.0 until the 
darn jpackage rpmbuild worked....that's the definition of being a 
'contributor' versus an 'armchair quarterback'.

[rlc at bobcp4 ~]$ ~/tmp/jdk1.5.0/bin/java -version
java version "1.5.0"
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.5.0-b64)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 1.5.0-b64, mixed mode)



Bob Cochran
Greenbelt, Maryland, USA





Brian Chase wrote:

> One issue not yet mentioned in this thread is Java.  Java is painful 
> to install, and instructions on the Java website are poor at best, 
> confusing, switching between 32 bit instructions and 64-bit instructions.
>
> Right now, I don't have Java installed.  I need a script that will 
> take care of it all for me or just have it pre-installed out of the 
> box.  When will this happen?  I don't have time for this crapola.  It 
> needs to just work!  Sure, I understand that licensing issues may 
> prohibit inclusion of Java in Linux, but why then is it free?  Can't 
> we all just put our heads together, throw the lawyers out of the room 
> for an hour and fix this once and for all?
>
> Flash for x86-64 is non-existent.
>
> I haven't tried to replace my yum.conf file with the livna one, mainly 
> because I'm afraid to get a bunch of unwanted 32 bit apps, another 
> source of confusion.  Would be nice if all the good apps you could get 
> off of livna could just be included in the official repositories.  I 
> feel much of this "unofficial" business with some of the Fedora 
> support pages is just justified paranoia of our sue-happy culture we 
> have here in the USA.....Descending from my soap box....
>
> Happy New Year to all!
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> Alexander Volovics wrote:
>
>> In 2 weeks time I will be getting an amd64 machine and I have
>> been reading up on possible problems.
>> Because the answers to the questions I would like answered are
>> contaminated with hardware/software issues when googling or reading
>> mailing lists I hope to get some unequivocal answers here.
>>
>> - Can you install FC3-i386 on an amd64 machine without problems?
>>  Can the FC3-i386 kernel and drivers handel the hardware without
>>  problems?
>>
>> - Looking at the packages contained in FC3-x86_64 I see both i386
>>  and x86_64 versions for a lot of things. For example:
>>  hal-0.4.0-10.i386.rpm and hal-0.4.0-10.x86_64.rpm.
>>  Are the i386 versions included for 'compat' reasons, so you can
>>  run i386 apps under FC3-x86_64?
>>  And are they installed by default when doing a standard workstation
>>  install or do you add them if necessary?
>>  If they are available for 'compat' reasons are they sufficient for
>>  all i386 apps I would like to run or do you sometimes have to add
>>  extra i386 libraries?
>>  Can i386 libraries always coexist with x86_64 libraries without
>>  problems?
>>
>> - Do up2date/yum function faultlessly when adding i386 apps to
>>  a machine running FC3-x86_64.
>>
>> - If both FC3-i386 and FC3-x86_64 can run on an amd64 machine without
>>  problems are there significant advantages for the x86_64 version?
>>
>> - I will be getting a MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum board with an Athlon64
>>  3500+ socket 399 and an UDMA100 hard drive. Does anybody know of
>>  any special problems when installing either FC3-i386 or FC3-x86_64?
>>
>> Alexander
>>
>>  
>>
>