From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 29 15:35:44 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57F791065680 for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:35:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lenzi@k1.com.br) Received: from netuno.levier.com.br (netuno.levier.com.br [201.47.3.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B224E8FC0A for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:35:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lenzi@k1.com.br) Received: from levier.com.br (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by netuno.levier.com.br (8.14.2/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m7TA11CH034556; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:35:41 -0300 (BRT) (envelope-from lenzi@k1.com.br) X-MessageWall-Score: 0 (levier.com.br) Received: from [201.70.177.130] (authenticated as lenzi) by levier.com.br (MessageWall 1.0.8) with SMTP; 29 Aug 2008 15:35:40 -0000 From: sergio lenzi To: Bill Moran In-Reply-To: <20080829105706.cb72b17d.wmoran@potentialtech.com> References: <10549b080808290744u659d89f9m4c959a968cbe17e1@mail.gmail.com> <20080829105706.cb72b17d.wmoran@potentialtech.com> Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:34:14 -0300 Message-Id: <1220024054.2008.11.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: Ports and 64-bit Processors X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:35:44 -0000 Em Sex, 2008-08-29 às 10:57 -0400, Bill Moran escreveu: > In response to "FreeBSD Questions" : > > > FreeBSD has supported 64-bit architectures for a while now... Alpha > > and UltraSPARC come to mind--even if Alpha is no longer a Tier 1 > > architecture. I'm surprised to hear so many of you say that certain > > ports are broken on AMD64. I would think if they worked on other > > 64-bit processors they'd work on AMD64. Were the ports that are > > broken on AMD64 also broken on those other architectures, too? > > Most of the ports I've had problems with are desktop applications. > Stuff that doesn't often get installed/used on 64 bit. It's been a > while since we've tried (about 1 year) but Gnome was pretty unstable > on 64 bit at the time. I have had good experiences with gnome 2.22 and amd64 in produtcion systems running on dell poweredge with 4core cpus (4 logical processors) 2Gb of memory, 120 users using gnome, evolution, openoffice-3, epiphany, pidgin, java... postgres servers and a callcenter dial apllication, that needs an asterisk 1.4.21 (on 64 bit too...) runs about 24X7 the machine have somestimes 1200 process running full time alll the clients are thin clients (amd geode, 32 bits, 64mb)... 100 mbits ethernet.... with NO Backup... uptime is 38 days.... Yes... it needs more memory... =================================================== last pid: 65631; load averages: 0.89, 1.04, 1.07 up 38+05:23:12 12:23:15 824 processes: 1 running, 814 sleeping, 9 stopped CPU states: 2.8% user, 0.0% nice, 1.0% system, 0.5% interrupt, 95.7% idle Mem: 1147M Active, 100M Inact, 601M Wired, 92M Cache, 213M Buf, 12M Free Swap: 8192M Total, 1955M Used, 6237M Free, 23% Inuse, 12K In =================================================== we use it in our notebooks too (dell, acer, hp...) several ones about 20... 64 bits amd64 running on amd hardware or D series intel... The 32 bit version we use on the geode hardware.. but stays in the 64 bit machine exported in a nfs... Runs fine... Sergio