Search Results

Search found 22709 results on 909 pages for '64 bit'.

Page 2/909 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• How to build 64-bit Python on OS X 10.6 -- ONLY 64 bit, no Universal nonsense

  - by ssteiner

  I just want to build this on my development machine -- the binary install from Python.org is still 32 bits and installing extensions (MySQLdb, for example) is driving me nuts with trying to figure out the proper flags for each and every extension. Clarification: I did NOT replace the system Python, I just installed the Python.org binary into its normal place at /Library/..., not /System/Library/.... Everything else seems to build 64 bit by default, and the default Python 2.6.1 was 64 bit (before I replaced it with the Python.org build figuring it was a direct replacement)` I just want a 64 bit only build that will run on my one machine without any cruft. Does anyone have a simple answer? Thanks much, [email protected]

  Read the article

• Installing a new hardware enablement (HWE) stack in 64 bit Ubuntu

  - by Alexey

  I'd like to install 13.10 (Saucy) hardware enablement (HWE) stack to my Ubuntu 12.04 (64-bit) because I need a newer Linux kernel. This wiki page explains what "hardware enablement stacks" are. Among other things it says: Only the -generic x86 kernel flavor ... will be supported... Also, this answer says: ...This is only recommended for x86 hardware installations... Is x86 here synonymous to 32-bit/i386 architecture (but not 64-bit/AMD64), or is it i386/AMD64 (but not ARM)? Can I install this "hardware enablement stack" in a 64-bit/AMD64 Ubuntu? Will it be supported with future updates?

  Read the article

• Does 64-bit Ubuntu work on the Acer Aspire One D255

  - by hippietrail

  The Acer Aspire One D255 is the cheapest dual core netbook on the market right now. It has an Intel Atom N550 which should be able to run a 64-bit OS. But when I try to boot the Ubuntu 64-bit live CD I only get one line of diagnostic output that it "found something" on the USB CD drive before locking up. I haven't been able to find anything by Googling yet. Could it just be driver issues for this machine or could the platform be inherently frail for running 64-bit? (My machine is two days old on trial and Windows 7 and Ubuntu 32-bit run but it has locked up under casual use on both OSes.)

  Read the article

• installing ubuntu 13.04 along side window 7 64 bit

  - by Shikhar Subedi

  I have a 64 bit computer with windows OS. Here are my specifications: core i3 processor 4 gb ram nvdia ge210 hard disk with 680 gb memory In my windows installation I have C: drive with 104 gb, D: drive with 246gb and E: drive with 246gb memory. My dvd rom is in f: drive. I want to install ubuntu 13.04 64 bit along side windows 7. So i burned the ubuntu 64 bit iso image onto a dvd and restarted the computer. but in the choice for installations, there is no option to select installing ubuntu along side windows. There is an option to install ubuntu inside windows instead. There are other options as well. What should I do to get the option to install ubuntu along side windows. I think the problem is with the number of drives in windows. Please tell me how should I make a partition in windows 7 to install ubuntu. Thanks a lot..

  Read the article

• 64 bit vs 32 bit

  - by user53864

  When I was doing my course MCSA, I'm taught the following: With a 32-bit processor only 32-bit operating system can be installed. with a 64-bit processor both 32-bit & 64-bit operating system can be installed It's said 64-bit os cannot be installed on a 32-bit processor. I just want to make sure the above points because recently I'm asked to installed Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprize and while installation it showed only x64 and it simply installed it. I was thinking all the computers in my office having a 32-bit processor. If so how it could be possible to install a x64 bit os on a 32-bit processor? or I'm wrong with the 1st point or the processor may be of 64-bit(I don't know how to check). I'm confused... One thing what I know the benefits of 64-bit over 32-bit is faster operation. If anyone could tell me other benefits, it could be helpful for me. Thanks!

  Read the article

• 64 bit vs 32 bit

  - by user51737

  When I was doing my course MCSA, I'm taught the following: With a 32-bit processor only 32-bit operating system can be installed. with a 64-bit processor both 32-bit & 64-bit operating system can be installed It's said 64-bit os cannot be installed on a 32-bit processor. I just want to make sure the above points because recently I'm asked to installed Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprize and while installation it showed only x64 and it simply installed it. I was thinking all the computers in my office having a 32-bit processor. If so how it could be possible to install a x64 bit os on a 32-bit processor? or I'm wrong with the 1st point or the processor may be of 64-bit(I don't know how to check). I'm confused... One thing what I know the benefits of 64-bit over 32-bit is faster operation. If anyone could tell me other benefits, it could be helpful for me. Thanks!

  Read the article

• *Un*installing with Ubuntu Software Center (Centre) doesn't work on 64-bit 12.04.1

  - by likethesky

  Not sure if I'm doing something wrong, or if the .deb package I'm installing is broken in some way (I've built it, using NetBeans 7.2), or if indeed this is a bug in Software Center. When I install this particular 32-bit .deb on Ubuntu 10.04 LTS--all updates applied--(where it was built), GDebi shows it and has an 'Uninstall' button next to it. So it works fine to uninstall it there, via the GDebi GUI. However, when I install it on 12.04.1 LTS--all updates applied--it installs fine, but then does not show up in Ubuntu Software Center as available to be uninstalled. No combination of searching finds it. However, I can from the command line, do sudo apt-get purge javafxapplication1 and it finds it and deletes it. The same thing happens when I build a 64-bit .deb and attempt to install it to the same (64-bit AMD) or a different 64-bit Ubuntu 12.04.1 system. So it seems to be isolated to this NetBeans-generated .deb and the 64-bit AMD build (though I haven't tried it on a 32-bit 12.04.1 install yet). These are all on VirtualBox VMs, btw, if that matters. Any way to 'clean up' my Software Center and see if it's something I've done to get it in this state? Could this behavior be due to how this particular .deb has been built? (It doesn't have an 'Installed-Size' control field, so I do get the "Package is of bad quality" warning when I install it--which I do by clicking 'Ignore and install' button.) If you want all the gory details about why this happening--a bug has been reported against NetBeans for this behavior here: http://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-25486 (EDIT: Just to be clear, the app installs fine, runs fine, all works as intended--I just can't get that 'bad package' message to go away, and now... I also can't uninstall it via Software Center, but rather, need to use sudo apt-get purge to uninstall it, after it installs. /END EDIT) Thanks for any pointers. I'm happy to report this as a bug against Ubuntu Software Center/Centre too, if that's what it seems to be, just tell me where to do so (a link). I'm a relative Ubuntu, NetBeans, and JavaFX newbie, though a long-time programmer. If I report it as a bug, I'll try it on the 32-bit build of 12.04.1 as well. Also, if I should add any more detail to the bug reported against NetBeans above, let me know--or feel free to add it yourself to the bug report above, if you would like. Thanks again!

  Read the article

• Running 32-bit vs. 64-bit programs on a 64-bit OS

  - by HighCommander4

  If I'm running a 64-bit OS (Windows XP x64 edition) and a program has both a 32-bit version and a 64-bit version, what are the advantages of using the 64-bit version? Will it be faster?

  Read the article

• 32-bit / 64-bit processors - what is that feature officially called?

  - by JW01

  I see talk of CPU's being either 32-bit or 64-bit processors. Information which is often required on download pages But what is that feature officially called. i.e What's the inverse of saying "I have a 64-bit processor"? I want to say: The ??? of my processor is 64 bit What is the correct term to use for ??? I have looked at a random product on the Intel site and I suspect the correct word for this is "Instruction Set", but I'm not sure.

  Read the article

• How to fix Java problem installing Matlab 2012a (64-bit) in Ubuntu 12.04 (64 bit)?

  - by Sabyasachi

  I am trying to install Matlab 2012a (64-bit) in Ubuntu 12.04LTS (64-bit). I have installed Java 7. My Java version is: sabyasachi@sabyasachi-ubuntu:~/Downloads/R2012a_UNIX$ java -version java version "1.7.0_05" Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0_05-b05) Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 23.1-b03, mixed mode I am getting the following error while installing Matlab: sabyasachi@sabyasachi-ubuntu:~/Downloads/R2012a_UNIX$ ./install Preparing installation files ... Installing ... /tmp/mathworks_18824/sys/java/jre/glnxa64/jre/bin/java: error while loading shared libraries: libjli.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory Finished How can I fix this problem? When I use -v (verbose) option I am getting the following: sabyasachi@sabyasachi-ubuntu:~/Downloads/R2012a_UNIX$ sudo ./install -v Preparing installation files ... -> DVD = /home/sabyasachi/Downloads/R2012a_UNIX -> ARCH = glnxa64 -> DISPLAY = :0 -> TESTONLY = 0 -> JRE_LOC = /tmp/mathworks_26521/sys/java/jre/glnxa64/jre -> LD_LIBRARY_PATH = /tmp/mathworks_26521/bin/glnxa64 Command to run: /tmp/mathworks_26521/sys/java/jre/glnxa64/jre/bin/java -splash:"/home/sabyasachi/Downloads/R2012a_UNIX/java/splash.png" -Djava.ext.dirs=/tmp/mathworks_26521/sys/java/jre/glnxa64/jre/lib/ext:/tmp/mathworks_26521/java/jar:/tmp/mathworks_26521/java/jarext:/tmp/mathworks_26521/java/jarext/axis2/:/tmp/mathworks_26521/java/jarext/guice/:/tmp/mathworks_26521/java/jarext/webservices/ com/mathworks/professionalinstaller/Launcher -root "/home/sabyasachi/Downloads/R2012a_UNIX" -tmpdir "/tmp/mathworks_26521" Installing ... /tmp/mathworks_26521/sys/java/jre/glnxa64/jre/bin/java: error while loading shared libraries: libjli.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory Finished sabyasachi@sabyasachi-ubuntu:~/Downloads/R2012a_UNIX$

  Read the article

• Installing 64-bit Ubuntu alongside 32-bit Ubuntu?

  - by Macha

  I have a 64-bit processor in my PC, but because of worries over application compatibility, up until now I have been using 32-bit Ubuntu (and 32-bit Vista because Dell wouldn't sell me 64-bit with my PC). Is it possible for me to install 64-bit Ubuntu alongside 32-bit ubuntu and 32-bit Windows Vista, so I can choose between them at boot and share data, and without uninstalling my 32-bit Ubuntu? My partitions are as follows Drive 1: 10 GB Vista recovery partition (E:), 240 GB Windows NTFS parition (230 GB used, C:). Drive 2: 167 GB Windows NTFS Partition (130 GB used, D: ), 8 GB swap partition, 13 GB / partition (6 GB used), 62 GB /home partition (20 GB used).

  Read the article

• Windows 7 on a 64-bit computer

  - by GetFree

  I read on Wikipedia that Windows 7 on a 64-bit PC needs twice as much RAM as on a 32-bit PC. I understand why is that: every number stored in memory takes 8 bytes rather than just 4. That, in simple terms, means that your amount of RAM is reduced to half when you use Windows 7 on a 64-bit computer. Now, I have a Intel Core 2 Duo Laptop with Windows Vista right now (2 GB of RAM). My question is: Since Core 2 is a 64-bit architecture, if I upgrade to Windows 7 will my laptop be working as if it had just 1 GB of RAM? Or... to say it in other words: Having a 64-bit PC with Windows 7 do you need twice as much RAM as you need on a 32-bit PC to have the same performance? If I am right, then I'd say it's a terrible business to have a 64-bit computer and Windows 7 on it (I hope I am mistaken, though). Follow-up: After some answers, I'm realizing it's not the same thing to have a 32-bit OS on a 64-bit PC than a 64-bit OS on a 64-bit PC. Apparently, the problem of Windows 7 requiring twice as much RAM on 64-bit architectures is when you have both the OS and PC supporting 64 bits. I'd like new answers to address this issue. Also, is it possible to have more that 4 GB of RAM on a 64-bit PC using a 32-bit version of Windows?

  Read the article

• Windows 7 on a 64-bit computer

  - by GetFree

  I read on Wikipedia that Windows 7 on a 64-bit PC needs twice as much RAM as on a 32-bit PC. I understand why is that: every number stored in memory takes 8 bytes rather than just 4. That, in simple terms, means that your amount of RAM is reduced to half when you use Windows 7 on a 64-bit computer. Now, I have a Intel Core 2 Duo Laptop with Windows Vista right now (2 GB of RAM). My question is: Since Core 2 is a 64-bit architecture, if I upgrade to Windows 7 will my laptop be working as if it had just 1 GB of RAM? Or... to say it in other words: Having a 64-bit PC with Windows 7 do you need twice as much RAM as you need on a 32-bit PC to have the same performance? If I am right, then I'd say it's a terrible business to have a 64-bit computer and Windows 7 on it (I hope I am mistaken, though). Follow-up: After some answers, I'm realizing it's not the same thing to have a 32-bit OS on a 64-bit PC than a 64-bit OS on a 64-bit PC. Apparently, the problem of Windows 7 requiring twice as much RAM on 64-bit architectures is when you have both the OS and PC supporting 64 bits. I'd like new answers to address this issue. Also, is it possible to have more that 4 GB of RAM on a 64-bit PC using a 32-bit version of Windows?

  Read the article

• Install Opera on 64-bit

  - by maaartinus

  I tried to follow the instructions on the opera page, but it didn't work. I was assuming the base install should be the same for 64-bit, but it doesn't look so. After executing wget -qO - http://deb.opera.com/archive.key | sudo apt-key add - successfully sudo apt-get install opera says Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Package opera is not available, but is referred to by another package. This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or is only available from another source E: Package 'opera' has no installation candidate Below on the page I see A 64 bit Linux version is available, you should get it automatically either from the repositories or from Opera I haven't tried to download it manually, since I prefer to get it from a repo. It it possible?

  Read the article

• VMware Workstation reboot 32-bit host when starting 64-bit guest

  - by Powerman

  I'm trying to start 64-bit guest (MacOSX and Windows7) on 32-bit host (Hardened Gentoo Linux, kernel 2.6.28-hardened-r9) using VMware Workstation (6.5.3.185404 and 7.0.1.227600). If VT-X disabled in BIOS, VMware refuse to start 64-bit guest (as expected). If VT-X enabled in BIOS, VMware start guest without complaining, but then, in about a second (I suppose as soon as guest try to switch on 64-bit) my host reboots (actually, it's more like reset - normal reboot procedure skipped and BIOS POST start immediately). My hardware is Core 2 Duo 6600 on ASUS P5B-Deluxe with latest stable BIOS 1101. I've power-cycled system, then enabled Vanderpool in BIOS. My CPU doesn't support Trusted Execution Technology, and there no way to disable it in BIOS. I've rebooted several times after that, sometimes with power-cycled, and ensure Vandertool is enabled in BIOS. I've also run VMware-guest64check-5.5.0-18463 tool, and it report "This host is capable of running a 64-bit guest operating system under this VMware product.". About a year ago I tried to disable hardened in kernel to ensure this isn't because of PaX/GrSecurity, but that doesn't help. I have not checked 32-bit guests with VT-X enabled yet, but without VT-X they works ok. ASUS provide "beta" BIOS updates, but according to their descriptions these updates doesn't fix this issue, so I'm not sure is it good idea to try it. My best guess now it's motherboard/BIOS bug. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Blank screen after GRUB (64 bit) - cannot install Ubuntu

  - by peGGi

  My laptop's specs: Lenovo IdeaPad Z570 Intel Core i5-2410M @ 2.3Ghz 6 Gb RAM DDR3 640 Gb ATAPI Hard-disk Drive @ 5,200 RPM NVIDIA GeForce G520M with Optimus switching technology Broadcom 802.11n Network Adapter REALTEK soundcard Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit I downloaded Ubuntu Studio 11.04 and burned the iso image onto two different DVDs, using two different programs (one DVD is RW, the other is just R). I verified the hash MD5sum thing. I get as far as GRUB with the 4 options (install, advanced install, disk verification, system rescue) but no matter which one I select, I get a blank screen and nothing happens. The DVD drive spins down after about 30 seconds. Also just before the GRUB screen I get a message saying Error: "Prefix" is not set. I'm not sure if that's relevant. I have tried all the options using both DVDs. Same thing happens. I have changed the graphics setting in BIOS to UMA or Optimus, but still happens either way. I've tried booting with the wireless switch turned off, same thing happens. I downloaded 'vanilla' Ubuntu 64-bit and burned onto a CD, and the same thing happens. I have downloaded Ubuntu 32-bit and I am able to boot from the live CD (interestingly the wireless card won't work, but that's maybe another issue). I have searched extensively through these forums and other sites but I can't see anything that will help me. Is there something I'm missing? I'd really appreciate help on this. The laptop is less than 2 weeks old. I was so looking forward to getting Ubuntu Studio up and running. I've gone about as far as my technical abilities will allow.

  Read the article

• Merging `Program Files` and `Program Files (x86)` folders in Windows 7 64-bit

  - by Mehper C. Palavuzlar

  Windows 7 64-bit version installs 32-bit programs to Program Files (x86) folder, and 64-bit programs to Program Files folder. Of course, Microsoft must have a reason for doing that, but as a user I don't find it handy to have 2 separate program folders. Is there any way to merge those folders into one (preferably, Program Files) without corrupting installed programs? And would it be a problem to install 32-bit applications into Program Files folder?

  Read the article

• Substitute drivers for a 32 bit printer on a 64 bit OS

  - by Derek G

  I'm trying to use an old GCC Elite 12N B&W laser printer for printing schoolwork and other miscellany on 64 bit Windows 7. The only drivers available are 32 bit. As far as I know, it's not possible to use 32 bit drivers on a 64 bit OS, but is there some sort of generic Postscript driver I could substitute? If the drivers are, in fact, compatible, could someone suggest a way to modify the INF file so that Windows will recognize it? Thanks for your help!

  Read the article

• How-to: determine 64-bitness of Windows? [closed]

  - by warren

  Possible Duplicate: Tell the version of Windows XP (64-bits or 32-bits) Is it possible to determine whether a given installation of Windows is 32- or 64-bit? From right-clicking on My Computer, and selecting Properties, it appears that such information is not readily available. Typing ver at the command prompt also doesn't seem to return anything about the nature of the platform in which it is installed. Under Linux, I'd use uname -a to find out what kernel was running. Is there an analog on Windows?

  Read the article

• Flash isn't working in Chrome on 64 bit Ubuntu 10.10 fresh install

  - by IanBalisy

  I just installed Ubuntu 10.10 64 bit last night on my laptop and installed Google Chrome ver. 8.0.552.237. So far flash works on Firefox and Chromium, but not at all on Chrome. I did the sevenmachines install for flashplugin64 and that worked for firefox and chromium. Anyone know how to make it work on Chrome? I really would prefer to use Chrome over Chromium, but if it's not an easy fix I can switch. I'm not too Ubuntu literate, but I can figure things out if necessary. (In short, long explanations are not necessary).

  Read the article

• Install Windows 8 64-bit over the top of Windows 8 32-bit

  - by Andrew Gee

  I currently have Windows 8 32-bit installed from MSDN (I didn't realise at the time that my processor supports 64-bit). I understand that you can't upgrade within Windows 32-bit to 64-bit directly from the ISO. I have burned the ISO to a DVD, and have attempted booting from this drive. The problem I am encountering: The operating system couldn't be loaded because a required file is missing or contains errors. File: CI.dll Error code: 0xc0000221 You'll need to use the recovery tools on your installation media. If you don't have any installation media (like a disc or USB device), contact your system administrator or PC manufacturer. Additional info: Computer: HP Pavillion m9280.uk-a Processor: AMD Phenom 9600 Quad-Core RAM: 3 1GB sticks Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Reasons for either 32-bit or 64-bit as development machine

  - by vartec

  I'm about to make a new Linux install, which will be primarily used for programming. I've seen benchmarks showing speed improvement of 64-bit version, however, I have hard time of telling how much these benchmarks translate to improvement in every day usage. And of course there are other aspects to consider. Usage I have in mind: mainly programming Python, with occasional C, C++ and Java; IDEs, which are using Java platforms (Eclipse and IntelliJ); on very rare occasions having to compile for 32-bit platform; not planning to have more than 64GB of RAM anytime soon (and I don't mind using PAE kernels); machine in question has 4GB RAM and Athlon II X2; What are pros and cons of choosing either i386 or x86_64 distro?

  Read the article

• Cannot install ia32-libs on a 64 bit Ubuntu installation

  - by Swarnendu Biswas

  I am using a 64-bit installation of Oneiric. I need to install the ia32-libs package to get some applications (evince, adobe reader) to work. For example, adobe reader is giving the following error: error while loading shared libraries: libGL.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory. However, I am not able to install it since it is showing a dependency on ia32-libs-multiarch, which in turn is showing a dependency on gstreamer0.10-plugins-good:i386. This in turn depends on few other packages. How can I install these packages safely and still meet all the dependencies.

  Read the article

• Install Lightscribe on 64 bit AMD Error

  - by user170573

  I am trying to install lightscribe on a 64 bit Ubuntu 12.04. I have installed the 32 bit libs and I keep getting the following message: tedsch47@Ted-Laptop:~/Downloads/Programs$ sudo dpkg --install --force architecture lightscribe-1.18.27.10-linux-2.6-intel.deb (Reading database ... 574566 files and directories currently installed.) Preparing to replace lightscribe:i386 1.18.27.10 (using lightscribe-1.18.27.10-linux-2.6-intel.deb) ... Unpacking replacement lightscribe:i386 ... Setting up lightscribe:i386 (1.18.27.10) ... ln: failed to create symbolic link `/usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5': File exists How do I fix this?

  Read the article

• Upgrading from 32 to 64 Bit Windows 7, without losing program installations/games

  - by Fogest

  I recently built a new computer and put the wrong installation of Windows on (32 bit), meaning I cannot use all of my RAM. I would like to upgrade to the 64 bit version, though I already have downloaded many programs and games which would total to around 30 GB give or take. I don't have the kind of data usage with my ISP to re-download this much data again, until next month (total GB will be higher as time goes on). I know there is Windows Easy Transfer, but it is not so much my data itself I'm worried about, it is more having to re-download and install a bunch of games and applications. Is it possible to perform an upgrade from 32 bit to 64 bit without this loss?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >