586 vs 686

Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com
Fri Feb 20 05:44:08 UTC 2009


Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Mike Chambers <mike at miketc.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 03:06 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>
>>> But why aren't you running 64-bit Fedora in the first place?
>> Not sure, guess didn't want to deal with 64/32 bit mixing for flash and
>> whatever else might have needed.  But since then, think flash and
>> whatever has been fixed to support 64bit so might give it a shot again.
>> Guess have to reset my rsync scripts heh.
> 
> Flash wouldn't have been much of an issue in any case—
> nspluginwrapper.  It has the nice side effect of also suppressing many
> of the flash related crashes that you'd otherwise experience.
> 
> (I don't normally run flash, but I installed it (the new 64bit native
> version; without using the wrapper) so I could use adobe alchemy to
> port a piece of software to the flash VM.  I didn't make it through
> the day before it crashed my browser. Fortunately I didn't need it any
> longer… the crash reminded me to remove it. :)
> 

Flash being entirely userspace relying on userspace libraries wont have 
a problem with x86_64 kernel on i586 userspace.

What will likely be problematic (maybe impossible) is dkms or third 
party kernel modules for nvidia, fglrx, Virtual Box, kqemu and other 
things Fedora does not support anyway.

I suspect gcc 32bit, 32bit toolchain and kernel-devel cannot build 
x86_64 kernel modules?

Warren Togami
wtogami at redhat.com




More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list