I’m considering installing a new systevm. I’m now running Leap 42.1 with 64bit architecture. But I like to run 32bit, because I believe I don’t have enough RAM to get the benefits of 64bit (I have 1.95GB).
Furthermore I think I don’t like this btrfs and want to switch back to ext4.
I turned to http://software.opensuse.org/422/en in order to download the ISO for USB-stick. But the file that’s on offer there is called
openSUSE-Leap-42.2-DVD-x86_64.iso
The “64” refers to 64bit, doesn’t it? So where do I get the 32bit version? Is there even one?
Well, since it’s written in the system requirements that 1GB RAM is enough (and 2GB are recommended), maybe I decide to stick with 64bit.
I know I have to reformat for ext4. I would do it when installing the new system.
There are just sometimes little pauses in the performances. I thought they are caused both by the filesystem and the presumably unfitting 64bit.
EDIT: No Henk, the plan to switching to ext4 is not related to the 32/64bit issue. They are just to topics that lead to the same conclusion: they slow down the performance and need to be changed.
I have 64-bit Leap 42.2 running well on a 2007 vintage computer with 2G of memory. For what I do, that’s plenty of memory. But it depends on how you use the computer.
And yes, I am using “ext4” for the file systems. As far as I can see, “btrfs” has some neat features that I would never use. So I prefer to keep it simple. I did experiment with “btrfs” on a different computer. It didn’t do anything useful for me.
What would be considered an “unofficial 32bit Leap”?
My feeling is that SUSE is losing a lot of potential for Leap on this decision to not support 32bit. It is not a niche platform after all.
I personally know a lot of people here in Germany who still use their 32bit computers alongside their 64bit ones.
So they had to go with Tumbleweed for their 32bit machines. As for their 64bit machines they also went with Tumbleweed for keeping the systems consistent.
In the end Leap will not gain users, but lose them to Tumbleweed when they can run it everywhere.
And when Tumbleweed ceases 32bit support it will be lost for SUSE completely, as then another x86 distro will come in and surely its x64 counterpart will also be used for consistency.
For a distribution used primarily in Germany and experiencing this, i fear for the future of OpenSUSE.
On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 17:06:01 +0000, connormcl wrote:
> My feeling is that SUSE is losing a lot of potential for Leap on this
> decision to not support 32bit. It is not a niche platform after all.
This was discussed (and argued) extensively on the devel mailing list -
at the end of the day, nobody stepped up to maintain a 32-bit version.
32-bit processors stopped being mass-produced years ago.
So the options for those who want a 32-bit version of openSUSE are to
start their own project to create a 32-bit port of Leap, or use an
outdated version - or pick up maintenance on the Evergreen project.
You’re thinking only in terms of physical memory (64bit does support >4GB physical RAM without special extensions).
But you’d have to go all the way back to old 16-bit computing for when memory was directly addressable by default.
Since 32-bit operating systems were created, applications run in virtual memory maps so that applications <think> that they have full and total control on the machines they run. In fact different apps might think that they are using the exact same memory addresses, but the OS manages how these memory maps work so that actual, real memory use don’t conflict.
64-bit virtual memory maps are vastly larger and better for running applications, regardless if the application was written for 32-bit or not.
You can always select ext4 instead of btrfs during the installation.
On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 20:06:02 +0000, Jaizkibel wrote:
> hendersj;2809844 Wrote:
>>
>> > I believe I don’t have enough RAM to get the benefits of 64bit (I
>> > have 1.95GB).
>>
>> That doesn’t really matter. If your CPU is 64-bit, you should use a
>> 64-
>> bit operating system.
>>
>> Given that there isn’t a 32-bit version anyways, go ahead and use the
>> 64-
>> bit version.
>
> I have 2x intel core 2 cpu 6300 @ 1.86GHz
>
> Can you confirm this being 64-bit?
There are plenty of ways for you to check for that yourself.
> And you mean, even with a 32-bit CPU it would be acceptable to run a
> 64-bit OS?
No, of course not. As I said, if your CPU is 64-bit, then you should use
a 64-bit operating system - the amount of memory in your system is
irrelevant.
This is what you posted in the first post of this thread.
I’m now running Leap 42.1 with 64bit architecture.
Yes, when you are running Leap 42.1 64-bit (and there is no 32-bit version) then your architecture is 64-bit, else nothing would go.
And when you have a 64-bit architecture, then you should install a 64-bit OS.
That is what you say you did with 41.1 on the system. Now repeat that with 41.2
Ditto for me, to both. I also have some of the people I support running ancient 10+ year-old machines with 2 G, 64-bit 42.2 running just fine. And, yes, I set them up with ext4.
My opinion is that BTRFS is still more for the geeks who want to wrestle with their system from time-to-time.
I see great potential in it, though, for the future.
