Intel Atom Processor
in [Debian]
|
Prev: j2se on debian
Next: UDF: maximum file/directory limit?
From: Sjoerd Hardeman on 16 Feb 2010 05:10 Marc Olive schreef: > El Tuesday 16 February 2010 10:09:34 Warren King va escriure: >> Which architecture should I use for an Intel Atom Processor? > > If it's a 64 bits one you should use amd64, otherwise or in doubt use x86. So look up your processor in the list on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Atom_microprocessors and see if it names "Intel 64" among its capabilities. Sjoerd PS. Google and Wikipedia are your friends!
From: Tixy on 16 Feb 2010 05:20 On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 10:37 +0100, Marc Olive wrote: > El Tuesday 16 February 2010 10:09:34 Warren King va escriure: > > Which architecture should I use for an Intel Atom Processor? > > If it's a 64 bits one you should use amd64, otherwise or in doubt use x86. Just for clarity, the usual Debian name for the 32bit Intel CPU architecture is 'i386', this is what your see in iso image names - not 'x86'. -- Tixy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1266315194.2726.7.camel(a)computer2.home
From: Glenn English on 16 Feb 2010 09:00 >>> Which architecture should I use for an Intel Atom Processor? Or maybe just boot an amd64 CD and see if it works?? -- Glenn English ghe(a)slsware.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/F20880C1-D246-4DEF-98F6-9AE9E547D9F0(a)slsware.com
From: Alex Samad on 16 Feb 2010 15:40 On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 03:48:03PM +0000, Camaleón wrote: > On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 10:34:09 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > [snip] > There are still reasons to install a 64 bits kernel if the micro supports > it. In fact, I have an Intel Celeron with just 1 GiB of RAM (max. allowed > is 2 GiB) and installed a 64 bits (amd64) Debian, just for compatibility > issues with the rest of the machines which are also running 64 bits > kernels :-) interesting, could you elaborate, I have a mix of 32/64 bit machines and I can understanding the advantage of keep them all 64 bit, well the only 1 I can think of is package space / caching of packages, but I use the same config files across i386/amd64.... > [snip]
From: Camaleón on 16 Feb 2010 18:10
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 07:33:14 +1100, Alex Samad wrote: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 03:48:03PM +0000, Camaleón wrote: >> There are still reasons to install a 64 bits kernel if the micro >> supports it. In fact, I have an Intel Celeron with just 1 GiB of RAM >> (max. allowed is 2 GiB) and installed a 64 bits (amd64) Debian, just >> for compatibility issues with the rest of the machines which are also >> running 64 bits kernels :-) > > interesting, could you elaborate, I have a mix of 32/64 bit machines and > I can understanding the advantage of keep them all 64 bit, well the only > 1 I can think of is package space / caching of packages, but I use the > same config files across i386/amd64.... The main advantage of keeping the same architecture in this computer (even having no performance gain at all) is using it like a "guinea pig" for testing updates and packages that I can then install on production systems. It is no rare to see broken packages for 64-bits but not the 32-bits counterparts (or viceversa) so I prefer to first perform any test in the closest environment I can simulate to prevent further problems when implementing the updates or installing new packages on working systems. Having a 32-bit system on that computer has less benefit for me than installing a 64-bits one. That said, I also have a 32-bits VM, just for making comparisons between all of them :-) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2010.02.16.23.02.22(a)gmail.com |