[GripS]

So i had the 32bit version of ubuntu 7.04 running for some time now. 7.10 came out and i figured it's a perfect time to give the 64bit version a shot. After all... My processor is 64bit capable why not? Well.... Can't get it to install. I get the ubuntu screen with memtest and all. I select 'start or install ubuntu' and the screen goes blank. Hard drive activity and cd-rom activity for about 1 minute then nothing. So i figure my download or my install cd is hosed. I download it again and the same thing happens. So now i am downloading the 32bit version. I'm pretty sure this one will install just fine but i am curious. Anyone with a recent C2D or C2D quad running 64bit version of ubuntu? Please tell me where i am being a moron in the install process?

[GripS]

Found the solution....

For others. At the first boot screen hit F6 for additional boot options. Delete 'splash' from the command line and the install will continue. You may notice your screen go into sleep mode. Once the cdrom and hd activity light stop hit the space bar and you'll be at the install desktop. Rolling forward with the install right now.

[RobLinux]

Rather than re-downloading, you can check the iso file with md5sum, also it's possible to mount the iso via a loopback mount (described in man page of mount) to check individual files scanning whole hierarchy, via "md5sum -c <MD5SUM File>" (you may need to use find & xargs if they've lots of md5sum files scattered around.

I think the "why not" is just problems with 32 bit flash plugins etc. Unless you have applications that need huge memory and have huge RAM, the 64 bit mode is only a few % faster. Most CPUs are stalling on memory access whole time these days. Not serious issues, just don't expect huge benefits over 32 bit OS.

Hopefully the last nits with AMD64 will be solved soon, and then there'll be no reason not to go for it.

[GripS]

Originally Posted by RobLinux

Rather than re-downloading, you can check the iso file with md5sum, also it's possible to mount the iso via a loopback mount (described in man page of mount) to check individual files.

I think the "why not" is just problems with 32 bit flash plugins etc. Unless you have applications that need huge memory and have huge RAM, the 64 bit mode is only a few % faster. Most CPUs are stalling on memory access whole time these days. Not serious issues, just don't expect huge benefits over 32 bit OS.

Hopefully the last nits with AMD64 will be solved soon, and then there'll be no reason not to go for it.

Actually it came down to this: You need to remove the 'splash' portion of the boot command in /boot/grub/menu.lst. Otherwise you need to wait about 5 minutes before your desktop shows up.

Bottom line is you end up with a text boot but the end result is the same.

I should have googled before making another copy but the answer was well... a bit tough to find when using my search options. But when i included Q6600 in the mix it was right in front of me. Seems the developers took a liking to AMD and did not consider the Intel crowd. Anyway.... got it working. I may re-install with 32bit as i'm already seeing a lack of support for 64bit yet again...... Such a shame. I guess 64bit will never be mainstream with it's lacking support of good drivers and apps.

[RobLinux]

Originally Posted by GripS

Seems the developers took a liking to AMD and did not consider the Intel crowd. Anyway.... got it working. I may re-install with 32bit as i'm already seeing a lack of support for 64bit yet again...... Such a shame. I guess 64bit will never be mainstream with it's lacking support of good drivers and apps.

Intel are big contributors to Linux, there's no "dislike". But you have to remember, the Intel solution to 64bit was Itanic, for long time they were not going to do AMD64. The market forced them to do it, but .... they of course being Chipzilla, have to make a few tweaks, rather than just clone AMD, and call it something different again.

AMD64 has just been around for longer. Most server stuff will work fine with 64 bit, on desktop ppl are using AMD64 now, and the "consumer" style stuff will get worked through. I do know there is a difficulty with 32bit plugins, which would of course get solved, if 64bit native plugins got released.

As usual it's the binary crap that causes trouble, not FOSS. Those of you who just want things to work, could help things by reminding vendors that you select your hardware, based on quality GPL drivers being included in kernel. As well as encouraging ISV's to Free the source, you might never look at it, but you do want over ppl to be able to.

If you want a "no hassle" system, then 32bit is stable choice; if you like to be on bleeding edge then 64bit and be prepared to submit some bug reports and do some googling, for workrounds.