Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: Fedora 11 Released

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,603

    Default Fedora 11 Released

    Phoronix: Fedora 11 Released

    After getting hit by a two last minute delays, the final release of Fedora 11 (codenamed Leonidas) is now available. Red Hat's Paul Frields who leads the Fedora Project has announced its release in the usual creative release announcement. The Fedora 11 release notes are available at FedoraProject.org...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NzMxNA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    598

    Default

    How is it running a 64bit version compared to a 32bit?

    I remember in the beginning there were a lot of bugs in the 64bit versions.

    Have things changed, or they are equally stable?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    176

    Default

    Well, I don't use Fedora since a long time (last was FC-1 ), mostly Gentoo these days and Ubuntu soemtimes. However, everytime a Fedora is released, I feel excited and want to dance joyously on the streets . (Nope, not the case when a new Debian or OpenSuSe is released.) Perhaps every Fedora (especially the recent ones) are way more bleeding edge and/or innovative than contemporary distros and can be truly said as 'new'.

    Congratulations to Fedora . Meanwhile, if I get some time, I'll download and test the Nouveau driver on one of my Nvidia machines.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Louise
    ... 64bit version compared to a 32bit?
    Of course they are equally stable.

    Bugs if any are due to 3rd party closed source 32-bit apps. Right now, there are only two of them on my machine - Adobe acrobat reader (acroread) and Skype. However, Skype is rock stable, and Adobe reader is mostly stable.

    A small note of caution. In my opinion, it is better to have at least 1GB of RAM and preferably greater than 2GB for running 64-bit Linux. 64-bit apps seem to take roughly double the amount of RAM than their 32-bit counterparts. Also, my general opinion is that 64-bit seems slightly more heavy than 32-bit (may be just a placebo), but on modern machines, it is all fluid. (I have a desktop with Athlon64 X2 3800+ with 1GB of RAM and it sometimes runs out of RAM during intensive tasks or multitasking with 64-bit. It was something rare in 32-bit. But in general, performance is awesome. But the remaining ones - my notebooks with Core2 T5270 and P8700 and desktops with Core2 E8400 and Phenom X3 8500 are all awesome.)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    598

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hdas View Post
    Of course they are equally stable.
    It is not "of course". If you look in the WINE bugzilla, you will find bugs, that only is present on 64bit systems.

    Other programs have suffered, so I am interested in hearing from people that have tried the early 64 bit distributions, and how they compare with todays.

    Quote Originally Posted by hdas View Post
    A small note of caution. In my opinion, it is better to have at least 1GB of RAM and preferably greater than 2GB for running 64-bit Linux. 64-bit apps seem to take roughly double the amount of RAM than their 32-bit counterparts.
    That most be your imagination. That is not my experience with 64bit RHEL5.3 for server use.

    64bit might take up a little bit more memory, because some of the instructions now are longer.

    If you at Fedora 10 x86 vs A64, the 32bit version DVD iso is 3.4GB and the A64 is 3.9GB.

    I would expect the ratio would be somewhat the same for memory usage.

    Quote Originally Posted by hdas View Post
    Also, my general opinion is that 64-bit seems slightly more heavy than 32-bit (may be just a placebo), but on modern machines, it is all fluid. (I have a desktop with Athlon64 X2 3800+ with 1GB of RAM and it sometimes runs out of RAM during intensive tasks or multitasking with 64-bit. It was something rare in 32-bit. But in general, performance is awesome. But the remaining ones - my notebooks with Core2 T5270 and P8700 and desktops with Core2 E8400 and Phenom X3 8500 are all awesome.)
    64bit should only be faster, when you do float point calculations, on almost other cases, it should actually be a little slower, as you also have experienced.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    118

    Thumbs down

    I failed to install Fedora 11. It does unhandled exception after choosing keyboard layout so in moment of finding storage devices
    I bet this is stupid bug but i cannot do nothing. I don't use any raid or such stuff. F10 installed flawlessly.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    1,033

    Default

    Try to rewrite it in a new disk. It happened me once something similar with openSUSE and was fixed in that way.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    118

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Apopas View Post
    Try to rewrite it in a new disk. It happened me once something similar with openSUSE and was fixed in that way.
    Thanks but DVD is good because i checked installation on VirtualBox.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Louise View Post
    It is not "of course". If you look in the WINE bugzilla, you will find bugs, that only is present on 64bit systems.

    Other programs have suffered, so I am interested in hearing from people that have tried the early 64 bit distributions, and how they compare with todays.
    Having used 64-bit since 2003, it has some a long long long long way. Don't miss 32-bit at all. The two big holdouts were flash and java 64-bit plugins, but even those are in 64-bit flavor now.

    If you at Fedora 10 x86 vs A64, the 32bit version DVD iso is 3.4GB and the A64 is 3.9GB.

    I would expect the ratio would be somewhat the same for memory usage.
    Can't judge by iso size at all. 64-bit releases typically have 32-bit compatibility libraries also on the iso which adds to it's size. As far as memory usage goes 1 - 1 1/2 gig seems just as zippy as it does on 32-bit (talking about desktop usage here).

    64bit should only be faster, when you do float point calculations, on almost other cases, it should actually be a little slower, as you also have experienced.
    Well when we are talking about prepackaged distro's this isn't always the case. There are many more variables to consider such as to maintain compatibility often packages are not compiled with the additional instruction sets that are only found on 64-bit procs. An distro that is compiled for i586 for example defaults to not even utilizing MMX. A 64 bit distro on the other hand is going to have all the instuction sets such as MMX and SSE at least enabled. Other applications that can greatly benefit are items such as dbases and of course apps that can use large amounts of addressable ram (pae works for some things in 32-bit but not all, one maya model I have gobbles up 5GB as it is).

    Overall compatibility is great, I bet most of the wine issues you saw were actuall wine64 (running 64-bit window apps in wine) issues and not running wine32 in a 64-bit distro with the compatibility libraries installed. The benifits greatly out weigh the few items where it maybe extremely marginally slower (and I do mean extremely marginal). As a rule of thumb, performance wise a 64-bit os will run at least as fast as a 32-bit and in some cases can yield big gains for the little extra cost of memory.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    598

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Having used 64-bit since 2003, it has some a long long long long way. Don't miss 32-bit at all. The two big holdouts were flash and java 64-bit plugins, but even those are in 64-bit flavor now.
    That is very compelling, that it just works.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •