[ltp] Re: Which distro for ThinkPad T400s
Thu, 25 Feb 2010 23:25:36 +0100
As You might notice, choosing your Linux distribution is a matter of
taste, and how you're going to be using it. A "hard core" fanatic
would say Slackware, because you have full control, because you
compile every package from source, etc. Someone coming from Windoze
might choose something like Linspire on those Asus mininotes. As
someone before mentioned, for engineering applications, 64-bit is
probably better if the software you're going to use can make use of
it. Ubuntu usually comes better polished out-of-the-box than Debian,
with more stuff working directly. If you're used to doing some
configuration by hand (as I am), you might dislike the way things are
just a bit different in Ubuntu. RedHat and Suse are also pretty good,
but maintaining packages on RPM-based systems is still not as good as
with APT (Debian, Ubuntu, Mint, and other Debian derivates). You still
get the occasional dependency hell. 32-bit systems with PAE-enabled
kernel work well, and use more than 4GB RAM efficiently, without the
above mentioned problems that arise when running Flash and some
drivers under 64-bit.
So Petar, tell us how you want to use your T400.
2010/2/25 Karsten K=C3=B6nig <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> Am Donnerstag, 25. Februar 2010 22:00:06 schrieb Christoph Bier:
>> Richard Neill schrieb am 25.02.2010 18:49:
>> > Christoph Bier wrote:
>> >> Petar Milin schrieb am 25.02.2010 16:53:
>> >>> Hello!-
>> >>> I am now in doubt which distro to use for my T400s: Debian testing
>> >>> (amd64 net-install) or Ubuntu 9.10? Which one suits this T-version?
>> >> I'd go for Ubuntu 9.10 (32 bit) since I abandoned Debian about six
>> >> years ago. Others will tell you to go for Debian (or even other
>> >> distributions) ... It depends on your needs and preferences.
>> > Why would one use a 32-bit distro?
>> > I know that 32-bit distros are more memory-efficient if you have < 4GB=
>> > (because of smaller pointers), but doesn't that mean you are giving up
>> > on all the native advantages of 64-bit CPUs vs an i586, notably the
>> > extra registers?
>> AFAICS 64-bit distros don't run as smoothly as 32-bit distros do.
>> See also Ted's posting. YMMV. And to be honest I don't know whether
>> I'd take any noticeable advantage from extra registers. I have
>> installed 4 GB of RAM in my X200s running a 32-bit kernel with PAE.
>> I just told Petar for which distro *I* would go.
> Phoronix might not be as reputable as lwn but the test series they run of=
> yield very interesting information, in this case ubuntu 32bit vs 64bit ke=
> and the 64bit kernel outperforms 32 in quite some areas while otherwise
> drawing a tie with the 32bit kernel
> I am also running 64bit kernel and userland now (openSUSE btw) and haven'=
> found a flaw regarding choice of architecture, the only exception still b=
> flash, but it only acts up on closing firefox, and only in very rare case=
> Still flash shouldn't be the deal breaker here, it's one of the worst
> maintained pieces of software that is deployed on basicly every system, l=
> not get tied down by such awful software.
> The big programs for engineers like matlab and xilinx ise in my case are =
> 64bit and seem to also take advantage of it.
> Oh and about the distribution, I am happily running openSUSE 11.2 on my T=
> but as others suggested this basicly boils down to taste now, I also enjo=
> using Arch Linux for example.
> The linux-thinkpad mailing list home page is at:
V=C3=A4nliga h=C3=A4lsningar / Kind regards,
I would change the world, but they won't give me the sourcecode