W dniu 09/01/2015 o 12:11 AM, zeroleft pisze: > But, and I believe it's something similar for others, is because when a > machine has only 2GB of ram, (and life circumstances do not allow, at > this time, for memory upgrade or for simply buy a new PC), it probably > would be counterproductive try to run a 64-bit system in such modest > hardware.
I think it is unlikely you would loose perceived performance when switching to 64 bit. But of course you would also not gain any. On the other hand, your system would be compatible with all 32 and 64 bit applications. W dniu 08/31/2015 o 10:10 PM, zeroleft pisze: > Just by taking a look at > https://l10n.mozilla-community.org/~akalla/unofficial/seamonkey/nightly/, you > could think that Adrian Kalla will not provide any more binaries for > SeaMonkey on Linux 32-bits... You are right. There are four reasons why I needed to abandon 32 bit Linux builds: 1. My CentOS 6 32bit virtual machine did get corrupted, and as I found out, I had no backup of it. 2. My builds were taking too much space on the L10n server. 3. I needed CPU and RAM resources for Windows builds. 4. And the ultimate reason is Mozilla's switch to GTK3: there is no GTK3 for CentOS6 available (Mozilla seems to have produced own packages, but afaics, they can't be found anywhere publicly - which is BTW a really big shame, since there is now also no way to build an exact one-to-one build to check, if Mozilla did have to include something in their builds because of a National Security Letter...). And there is no 32 bit version of RHEL7/CentOS7, which needs to be used for SM 2.39+ builds (and my cross compile tries failed, and I have no more time to invest into this issue). -> 32 bit is dead. Long live 64 bit. _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
