[gentoo-amd64] i386 vs amd64

[gentoo-amd64] i386 vs amd64

[Sean]

I have a dual opteron here and I am thinking of putting Gentoo on it. I 
am trying to decide to go with either the amd64 or i386 version.

 From looking over the online portage database it does appear that at 
least openoffice-bin 1.1.5 lists as available and 2.0 in testing for 
amd64, one of my main apps I use often, beside firefox and thunderbird.

I have several Loki game titles around, are they able to run on amd64 
gentoo?

So I am asking some Gentoo amd64 users, are you happy with the version 
or would you have gained more with i386?
Do most applications work on amd64 or are there some important ones missing?

I know above is a little broad, but I am just trying to get an idea of 
the state of amd64. I have been looking over the list for several days 
now, but not much traffic.


				Thanks
				Sean
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] i386 vs amd64

[Harm Geerts]

>  From looking over the online portage database it does appear that at
> least openoffice-bin 1.1.5 lists as available and 2.0 in testing for
> amd64, one of my main apps I use often, beside firefox and thunderbird.
2.0 has been released to ~amd64, I'm merging it as I type.
I haven't had any trouble with 1.1.x
I'm using the openoffice-bin package myself.

> I have several Loki game titles around, are they able to run on amd64
> gentoo?
If you configure your kernel to support 32bit programs that should be no 
problem at all.
I play Enemy Territory and Neverwinter Nights on my system.

Executable file formats / Emulations  --->
	[*] IA32 Emulation

> So I am asking some Gentoo amd64 users, are you happy with the version
> or would you have gained more with i386?
> Do most applications work on amd64 or are there some important ones
> missing?
Other than macromedia flash I can't think of anything that would be "missing" 
from amd64.
But I dislike flash so that's not an issue for me.

> I know above is a little broad, but I am just trying to get an idea of
> the state of amd64. I have been looking over the list for several days
> now, but not much traffic.

In the end it really depends on what you expect from your system.
The applications you mentioned above are all available and work as good as on 
x86.
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] i386 vs amd64

[Richard Freeman]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, October 20, 2005 8:06 pm, Sean wrote:
> So I am asking some Gentoo amd64 users, are you happy with the version
> or would you have gained more with i386?
> Do most applications work on amd64 or are there some important ones
> missing?
>

Well, there is no question that more packages will work correctly and will
be stable on x86 than amd64.  Especially huge packages like openoffice,
and java also works much better on x86 (it depends on the app, some work
better than others, and some VMs are more stable with handle different
apps).

On the other hand, in real life the differences in usability are fairly
small.  The main deficiencies in amd64 are huge apps like openoffice that
haven't been ported, and small obscure apps that nobody has bothered to
get working.  Obviously the x86 platform benefits from most developers
targetting it natively.

Still, I'm very happy with amd64.  The performance should be significantly
improved, and you benefit from features like NX and large memory support.
I'm a bit of a tinkerer as well, so the occassional breakdown doesn't
bother me as long as core apps are stable (such as samba/apache/etc -
gotta keep the wife acceptance factor high and if the windows domain goes
down it is an issue).

If you're running a commercial server I wouldn't go anywhere near amd64
unless it is just running a small set of core apps (like apache) and you
expect to benefit from the improved performance.  On the other hand, if
you're deploying a non-saturated general-purpose server you really should
be going with something more stable (probably debian).

Keep in mind that you can run x86 in a chroot just fine, and that is
reasonably convenient for anything other than servers/daemons since they
aren't running out of /etc/init.d.

I'm guessing that if you're adventurous enough to be running gentoo in the
first place you'll be fairly happy with amd64.  There are also lots of
ways to contribute if you run amd64.  Just about all package developers
who are running on x86 are happy to receive feedback from amd64 users,
especially if you suggest patches (not that I personnally excel at this).
In this way even a somewhat novice programmer can contribute to major
projects in ways that some of the more senior developers cannot by virtue
of having a different platform to test on.  I think you'll also find that
amd64 has one of the largest groups of dedicated developers in gentoo, and
the amd64 herd is probably larger than any comparable group on almost any
distro...

So, overall I'm very happy with amd64, even if it does mean fixing the
occassional bug now and then.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDWDsvg2bN8aFizRkRAm7uAKCNgdH6g7CaJv2ItQz5i8wZm4rVLQCeIImQ
RIUvCxZUUNhB189iIlUT6vU=
=LUjd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] i386 vs amd64

[Francisco Perez]

I guess I'll just drop my two cents in to disagree as far as AMD64 
Gentoo not being production worthy.  I have had a very pleasant 
experience running my GX-28 server in production for 7 months now 
without a single problem.  Since the server was installed, it has had 
100% uptime, except for 3 reboots for kernel upgrades.  The price for 
the server was $2,600 and I have been able to use it to completely 
replace 3 different Dell dual 1GHz Xeon servers with it that were bought 
for far more than this one.  During testing I kept added apps from the 
other servers and the fully loaded AMD server's performance (I'm 
comparing total CPU usage %) was better than any of the Dell's were with 
far fewer apps install.  Something else to mention is that the Dell's 
had SCSI 320 with 4 Seagate Cheetahs each and a hardware raid controller 
while the AMD server is SATA with a hardware raid controller.  I realize 
that's a faulty comparison because the Dell's had a combined 2 GHz each 
while the AMD server has dual 246 opterons, but my real point is just 
that in my experience (so far) everything has been as stable as the 
Intel servers.  Another thing I noticed is that the AMD server produces 
  FAR less heat than the Intel servers and is also quieter.  However for 
the first thirty seconds when the server boots up it is LOUD, but the 
the fans slow down and then eventually turn off (I have a way too big AC 
unit dedicated to my clean room/server closet).  Also speaking purely of 
personal preference, I find that Gentoo's portage is a much more 
efficient in managing a business environment where we are managing a 
handful of linux machines, all of which are Gentoo.  What I have been 
doing is every time a PC needs to be replaced, I have been switching it 
from WinTel to an AMD64 Gentoo box, with the exception of my 2 
Engineering and drafting staff which I am stuck with Windows because I 
haven't found a suitable replacement for AutoCad or SAP2000.  The idea 
is to have our office running all AMD Gentoo at some point in the near 
future.  So far  I have 5 AMD Gentoo boxes (including the server), and 5 
WinTel workstations including the 2 Eingineering and drafting ones.  If 
anyone else is doing a migration like this I'd love to share notes.

Frank Perez


> If you're running a commercial server I wouldn't go anywhere near amd64
> unless it is just running a small set of core apps (like apache) and you
> expect to benefit from the improved performance.  On the other hand, if
> you're deploying a non-saturated general-purpose server you really should
> be going with something more stable (probably debian).
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] i386 vs amd64 (continued)

[Francisco Perez]

I forgot to include a little about the box and its use

Tyan GX-28
2 * Opteron 246
8 GB's of RAM
4 250GB Seagate H.D.'s
3Ware hardware RAID controller

Services (all through portage):
Apache 2.x
PHP 5 with almost all the use flags active
POSTGRES 8.X
SQL-Ledger
NFS
SAMBA
GKrellm
CUPS printer server

Its behind the firewall and provides no services to the outside (that I 
know of :-D  ) and serve a total of 10 Workstations that store and 
retrieve all of their data from the server (nothing is stored on the 
workstations) and this include very large AutoCad and SAP2000 files.

Frank




Richard Freeman wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Thu, October 20, 2005 8:06 pm, Sean wrote:
> 
>>So I am asking some Gentoo amd64 users, are you happy with the version
>>or would you have gained more with i386?
>>Do most applications work on amd64 or are there some important ones
>>missing?
>>
> 
> 
> Well, there is no question that more packages will work correctly and will
> be stable on x86 than amd64.  Especially huge packages like openoffice,
> and java also works much better on x86 (it depends on the app, some work
> better than others, and some VMs are more stable with handle different
> apps).
> 
> On the other hand, in real life the differences in usability are fairly
> small.  The main deficiencies in amd64 are huge apps like openoffice that
> haven't been ported, and small obscure apps that nobody has bothered to
> get working.  Obviously the x86 platform benefits from most developers
> targetting it natively.
> 
> Still, I'm very happy with amd64.  The performance should be significantly
> improved, and you benefit from features like NX and large memory support.
> I'm a bit of a tinkerer as well, so the occassional breakdown doesn't
> bother me as long as core apps are stable (such as samba/apache/etc -
> gotta keep the wife acceptance factor high and if the windows domain goes
> down it is an issue).
> 
> If you're running a commercial server I wouldn't go anywhere near amd64
> unless it is just running a small set of core apps (like apache) and you
> expect to benefit from the improved performance.  On the other hand, if
> you're deploying a non-saturated general-purpose server you really should
> be going with something more stable (probably debian).
> 
> Keep in mind that you can run x86 in a chroot just fine, and that is
> reasonably convenient for anything other than servers/daemons since they
> aren't running out of /etc/init.d.
> 
> I'm guessing that if you're adventurous enough to be running gentoo in the
> first place you'll be fairly happy with amd64.  There are also lots of
> ways to contribute if you run amd64.  Just about all package developers
> who are running on x86 are happy to receive feedback from amd64 users,
> especially if you suggest patches (not that I personnally excel at this).
> In this way even a somewhat novice programmer can contribute to major
> projects in ways that some of the more senior developers cannot by virtue
> of having a different platform to test on.  I think you'll also find that
> amd64 has one of the largest groups of dedicated developers in gentoo, and
> the amd64 herd is probably larger than any comparable group on almost any
> distro...
> 
> So, overall I'm very happy with amd64, even if it does mean fixing the
> occassional bug now and then.
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQFDWDsvg2bN8aFizRkRAm7uAKCNgdH6g7CaJv2ItQz5i8wZm4rVLQCeIImQ
> RIUvCxZUUNhB189iIlUT6vU=
> =LUjd
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-amd64] Re: i386 vs amd64

[Duncan]

Richard Freeman posted
<37186.202.248.61.99.1129855791.squirrel@rich.homedns.org>, excerpted
below,  on Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:49:51 -0400:

> Keep in mind that you can run x86 in a chroot just fine, and that is
> reasonably convenient for anything other than servers/daemons since they
> aren't running out of /etc/init.d.

This bears reemphasis.  There's little reason except for simple
time/laziness that a 100% x86 install would be better than a mainly amd64
system, since for the few things that /are/ binary only or not yet ported
to amd64, an x86 chroot should be the maximum required solution.  Most x86
applications won't even need that, as they'll run just fine on an amd64
system with the appropriate emul-linux-x86-XXXX libs installed.  

Do note that the emul-linux stuff is binary packages, however, generally
lightly optimized as they are designed to run on ia64/itanic as well.  For
more optimization or just because you are more comfortable with
from-source, the chroot does work, but it's really not necessary for the
vast majority of users that need only the occasional 32-bit app.

If you /do/ choose to go 32-bit chroot, but it's DEFINITELY a recommended
read in ANY case, take a look at the amd64 technotes, available here:

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/technotes/index.xml

*** AGAIN, READ THE ABOVE TECH NOTES!!! ***  They will answer a number of
questions before you ask and could save you some major headaches
needlessly going thru stuff others have already figured out.

> I'm guessing that if you're adventurous enough to be running gentoo in the
> first place you'll be fairly happy with amd64.  There are also lots of
> ways to contribute if you run amd64.  Just about all package developers
> who are running on x86 are happy to receive feedback from amd64 users,
> especially if you suggest patches (not that I personnally excel at this).
> In this way even a somewhat novice programmer can contribute to major
> projects in ways that some of the more senior developers cannot by virtue
> of having a different platform to test on.  I think you'll also find that
> amd64 has one of the largest groups of dedicated developers in gentoo, and
> the amd64 herd is probably larger than any comparable group on almost any
> distro...

That has been my experience as well.  I'll reemphasize the sizable amd64
herd part, and add that amd64 was the first to have arch testers (ATs),
and is still the only herd to have more than a small handful.  These ATs
have become an enormous resource to the Gentoo AMD64 team, one reason the
idea has been exported to some of the other archs as well.  

ATs are sort of developers in training, altho the AT position is certainly
important in its own right, as well.  They take a certification quiz and
do much of the grunt work in testing that a package is actually stable
enough on AMD64 to get the ~amd64 keyword, and eventually be upgraded to
amd64 stable.  They have read access to the CVS/Subversion tree, and
slightly elevated privileges on bugzilla, but any proposed patches and the
like still go thru a fully certified Gentoo developer to get into the
tree.  It's pretty safe to say that the ATs are one of the big reasons the
number of packages in portage available to amd64 and ~amd64 users has
grown to be near that of x86, and that is becoming more the case every
day.

(Let me be clear that I write this as a user, not an AT or developer
myself, tho I certainly intend to become an AT at some point, only haven't
yet.)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman in
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html


-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: i386 vs amd64

[Simon Stelling]

Duncan wrote:
> If you /do/ choose to go 32-bit chroot, but it's DEFINITELY a recommended
> read in ANY case, take a look at the amd64 technotes, available here:
> 
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/technotes/index.xml

For information about how to set up a chroot properly, you better read the 32bit 
chroot guide [1].

> *** AGAIN, READ THE ABOVE TECH NOTES!!! ***  They will answer a number of
> questions before you ask and could save you some major headaches
> needlessly going thru stuff others have already figured out.

Reading the technotes doesn't harm, but most of its content is just terribly 
old-cruft that is no longer relevant. Thus, the technotes will get removed as 
soon as everything relevant is moved to other docs. Currently, this is mainly 
the FAQ [2] and the chroot guide.

> amd64 stable.  They have read access to the CVS/Subversion tree, and
> slightly elevated privileges on bugzilla, but any proposed patches and the
> like still go thru a fully certified Gentoo developer to get into the

They don't have cvs read access yet, but hopefully they will after an updated 
version of GLEP 41 [3] is approved.

> tree.  It's pretty safe to say that the ATs are one of the big reasons the
> number of packages in portage available to amd64 and ~amd64 users has
> grown to be near that of x86, and that is becoming more the case every
> day.

You can say that again ;)

[1]
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/howtos/index.xml?part=1&chap=3
[2] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-amd64-faq.xml
[3] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0041.html

-- 
Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead
blubb@gentoo.org
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-amd64] Re: Re: i386 vs amd64

[Duncan]

Simon Stelling posted <4358D492.3020302@gentoo.org>, excerpted below,  on
Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:44:18 +0200:

> Reading the technotes doesn't harm, but most of its content is just terribly 
> old-cruft that is no longer relevant. Thus, the technotes will get removed as 
> soon as everything relevant is moved to other docs. Currently, this is mainly 
> the FAQ [2] and the chroot guide [1].
> 
> [ATs] don't have cvs read access yet, but hopefully they will after an
> updated version of GLEP 41 [3] is approved.
> 
> [1]
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/howtos/index.xml?part=1&chap=3
> [2] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-amd64-faq.xml 

Thanks for the updated links and info!

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman in
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html


-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] i386 vs amd64 (continued)

[Andreas Vinsander]

Francisco Perez wrote:
> I forgot to include a little about the box and its use
> 

<snip>

> 
> Services (all through portage):
> Apache 2.x
> PHP 5 with almost all the use flags active
> POSTGRES 8.X
> SQL-Ledger

Hm, interesting, so you have a nice ebuild for SQL-Ledger?
I would be very interested in getting my hands on that... ;-)

/Andreas
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Re: i386 vs amd64

[Sean]

All, thanks for your responses.
I am go to try out the amd64 version.


		Thanks again,
		Sean



-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list