Search Results

Search found 23950 results on 958 pages for 'ie8 64 bit'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 3/958 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • Adobe Reader (acroread) 64 bit looks bad

    - by andreas-1724
    I installed acroread on Ubuntu 14.04 64-bit with gdebi (also tried dpkg and via repository "deb http://archive.canonical.com/ precise partner"). The result looks bad. For example the open-dialog is out of place, the folder-icons are green and the buttons are not rounded. Actually when I start acroread from the command-line, I get several messages and warnings: Gtk-Message: Failed to load module "overlay-scrollbar" Gtk-Message: Failed to load module "unity-gtk-module" Gtk-WARNING **: Unable to locate theme engine in module_path: "murrine" Gtk-Message: Failed to load module "canberra-gtk-module" I remember, that I had this problem, whenever I used a 64bit-Ubuntu (even Ubuntu 12.04), but not when I used a 32bit-Ubuntu.

    Read the article

  • How to install Citrix receiver xubuntu 13.04 64-bit

    - by Bård S
    Anyone have a walkthrough on installing Citrix receiver on Xubuntu 13.04 64-bit? Update $ sudo apt-get install libmotif4 nspluginwrapper ... snip ... Setting up libmotif4:amd64 (2.3.3-7ubuntu1) ... Setting up nspluginviewer (1.4.4-0ubuntu5) ... Setting up nspluginwrapper (1.4.4-0ubuntu5) ... plugin dirs: nspluginwrapper: no appropriate viewer found for /usr/lib/flashplugin-installer/libflashplayer.so Auto-update plugins from /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins Looking for plugins in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins Segmentation fault (core dumped) Processing triggers for libc-bin ... ldconfig deferred processing now taking place sudo dpkg --install Downloads/icaclient_12.1.0_amd64.deb Selecting previously unselected package icaclient. (Reading database ... 155808 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking icaclient (from .../icaclient_12.1.0_amd64.deb) ... dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of icaclient: icaclient depends on libc6-i386 (>= 2.7-1); however: Package libc6-i386 is not installed. icaclient depends on ia32-libs; however: Package ia32-libs is not installed. icaclient depends on lib32z1; however: Package lib32z1 is not installed. icaclient depends on lib32asound2; however: Package lib32asound2 is not installed. dpkg: error processing icaclient (--install): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: icaclient

    Read the article

  • Making Cisco WebEx work with 13.10 Saucy 64-bit

    - by Russ Lowenthal
    I was having a very hard time getting webex to work under Saucy. Up until now I've been able to just install a java plugin, install ia32-libs, and I was good to go. With Saucy ia32-libs is gone and it's up to us to figure out which 32-bit libraries we need to install. I struggled with this for a few days trying blindly to install this and that until I found a way to get exactly what I need. I got the clue I needed from this post: http://blogs.kde.org/2013/02/05/ot-how-get-webex-working-suse-linux-122-64bit#comment-9534 and for anyone who wants it, here is a step-by-step method to follow that works every time (so far) ***Install JDK and configure java plugin for browser. No need for a 32-bit JDK or Firefox ***Try to start a webex. This will create $HOME/.webex/1324/ ***Check those .so libraries for unresolved dependencies by running ldd against them. For example: ldd $HOME/.webex/1324/*.so >>check.txt Look in check.txt for anything that is not found. For example, I found: > libdbr.so: > linux-gate.so.1 => (0xf7742000) > libjawt.so => not found > libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libX11.so.6 (0xf75e6000) > libXmu.so.6 => not found > libdl.so.2 => /lib/i386-linux-gnu/libdl.so.2 (0xf75e0000)* ***Find what packages provide that file by installing apt-file with: sudo apt-get install apt-file apt-file update note: apt-file update will take a while, go get a cup of tea then locate which package contains your missing libraries with: apt-file search libXmu.so.6 apt-file search libjawt.so ***and fix it using: apt-get install -y libxmu6:i386 apt-get install -y libgcj12-awt:i386

    Read the article

  • Issue running 32-bit executable on 64-bit Windows

    - by David Murdoch
    I'm using wkhtmltopdf to convert HTML web pages to PDFs. This works perfectly on my 32-bit dev server [unfortunately, I can't ship my machine :-p ]. However, when I deploy to the web application's 64-bit server the following errors are displayed: (running from cmd.exe) C:\>wkhtmltopdf http://www.google.com google.pdf Loading pages (1/5) QFontEngine::loadEngine: GetTextMetrics failed () ] 10% QFontEngineWin: GetTextMetrics failed () QFontEngineWin: GetTextMetrics failed () QFontEngine::loadEngine: GetTextMetrics failed () QFontEngineWin: GetTextMetrics failed () QFontEngineWin: GetTextMetrics failed () QFontEngineWin: GetTextMetrics failed () QFontEngine::loadEngine: GetTextMetrics failed () ] 36% QFontEngineWin: GetTextMetrics failed () QFontEngineWin: GetTextMetrics failed () // ...etc.... and the PDF is created and saved... just WITHOUT text. All form-fields, images, borders, tables, divs, spans, ps, etc are rendered accurately...just void of any text at all. Server information: Windows edition: Windows Server Standard Service Pack 2 Processor: Intel Xeon E5410 @ 2.33GHz 2.33 GHz Memory: 8.00 GB System type: 64-bit Operating System Can anyone give me a clue as to what is happening and how I can fix this? Also, I wasn't sure what to tag/title this question with...so if you can think of better tags/title comment them or edit the question. :-)

    Read the article

  • "This CPU is not compatible with 64-bit mode." - Installing Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit on a netbook with a 64-bit Intel Atom CPU

    - by galacticninja
    I tried installing Windows 7 Ultimate SP 1, 64-bit on a netbook (Lenovo IdeaPad S110), which has the Intel Atom N2800 (1.86 GHz) as its processor, but I get the following error message when the Windows 7 installation DVD is loading: It says "Attempting to load a 64-bit application, however this CPU is not compatible with 64-bit mode". The Intel Atom N2800 is a 64-bit CPU according to its webpage. I am wondering why the Windows 7 installer shows this error message, despite this. Is there something I must configure first before installing Windows 7, 64-bit? Or is the netbook not compatible with a 64-bit OS? I am trying to format the netbook and install Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit, instead. Other details: The netbook has 2 GB RAM. The netbook initially had Windows 7 Starter (32-bit) installed.

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu Natty: 32-bit userland, 64-bit kernel?

    - by dsimcha
    I'm trying to manually install a 64-bit kernel for 32-bit Ubuntu. I have my reasons for doing so, but they're too complicated to explain here. Prior to Natty, this worked fine. Now, on Natty, I get the following error message when I try doing it the same way: dsimcha@dsimcha-laptop:~$ sudo dpkg -i --force-architecture linux-image-2.6.38-8-server_2.6.38-8.42_amd64.deb [sudo] password for dsimcha: dpkg: error processing linux-image-2.6.38-8-server_2.6.38-8.42_amd64.deb (--install): cannot access archive: No such file or directory Errors were encountered while processing: linux-image-2.6.38-8-server_2.6.38-8.42_amd64.deb dsimcha@dsimcha-laptop:~$ cd Downloads/ dsimcha@dsimcha-laptop:~/Downloads$ sudo dpkg -i --force-architecture linux-image-2.6.38-8-server_2.6.38-8.42_amd64.deb dpkg: warning: overriding problem because --force enabled: package architecture (amd64) does not match system (i386) (Reading database ... 159153 files and directories currently installed.) Preparing to replace linux-image-2.6.38-8-server:amd64 2.6.38-8.42 (using linux-image-2.6.38-8-server_2.6.38-8.42_amd64.deb) ... Done. Unpacking replacement linux-image-2.6.38-8-server:amd64 ... Examining /etc/kernel/postrm.d . run-parts: executing /etc/kernel/postrm.d/initramfs-tools 2.6.38-8-server /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.38-8-server run-parts: executing /etc/kernel/postrm.d/zz-update-grub 2.6.38-8-server /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.38-8-server dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-image-2.6.38-8-server:amd64: linux-image-2.6.38-8-server:amd64 depends on initramfs-tools (>= 0.36ubuntu6). linux-image-2.6.38-8-server:amd64 depends on coreutils | fileutils (>= 4.0); however: Package coreutils:amd64 is not installed. linux-image-2.6.38-8-server:amd64 depends on module-init-tools (>= 3.3-pre11-4ubuntu3); however: linux-image-2.6.38-8-server:amd64 depends on wireless-crda; however: dpkg: error processing linux-image-2.6.38-8-server:amd64 (--install): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: linux-image-2.6.38-8-server:amd64 When I try the dependencies manually, I get, for example: dsimcha@dsimcha-laptop:~/Downloads$ sudo dpkg -i --force-architecture coreutils_8.5-1ubuntu6_amd64.deb dpkg: warning: overriding problem because --force enabled: package architecture (amd64) does not match system (i386) dpkg: error processing coreutils_8.5-1ubuntu6_amd64.deb (--install): coreutils:amd64 8.5-1ubuntu6 (Multi-Arch: no) is not co-installable with coreutils:i386 8.5-1ubuntu6 (Multi-Arch: no) which is currently installed Errors were encountered while processing: coreutils_8.5-1ubuntu6_amd64.deb Has anyone had any success installing 64-bit kernels on 32-bit Natty? If so, how can this be done?

    Read the article

  • Run an application only compatible with 32-bit on 64-bit machine

    - by Glenn
    Title's pretty explanatory. I have an application(Second Life) that isn't compatible with 64-bit windows 7. It says that it is compatible with Windows XP, Vista, and 7 but only the 32-bit version of 7. I need to know if it's possible for me to download something to make the application compatible with my computer. I've run troubleshooters and ran it as windows compatible XP service pack 2 and tried again with service pack 3.

    Read the article

  • SCCM Report to identify machines with 64-bit capable hardware

    - by GAThrawn
    Currently looking at deployment options for Windows 7. One of the questions we're looking into is 32 bit vs 63 bit. I'm trying to run a SCCM report against our estate to identify which machines are 64-bit capable (whether or not they're currently running a 64-bit OS). There seem to be a few resources out on the net for this (here, here and here) but none of them seem to work right on machines running 32-bit Windows XP. 32-bit XP machines seem to always report that they're running on 32-bit hardware. The query I'm currently running is: select sys.netbios_name0, sys.Operating_System_Name_and0 as OperatingSystem, case when pr.addresswidth0=64 then '64bit OS' when pr.addresswidth0=32 then '32bit OS' end as [Operating System Type], case when pr.DataWidth0=64 then '64bit Processor' when pr.DataWidth0=32 then '32bit Processor' end as [Processor Type], case when pr.addresswidth0=32 and pr.DataWidth0=64 then 'YES' end as [32-bit OS on x64 processor] from v_r_system sys join v_gs_processor pr on sys.resourceid=pr.resourceid I've also tried this, which reports all "Windows XP Professional" systems are on "X86-based PC", not x64 based even though a number of them definitely are: select OS.Caption0, CS.SystemType0, Count(*) from dbo.v_GS_COMPUTER_SYSTEM CS Left Outer Join dbo.v_GS_OPERATING_SYSTEM OS on CS.ResourceID = OS.ResourceId Group by OS.Caption0, CS.SystemType0 Order by OS.Caption0, CS.SystemType0 For instance we have a set of Dell Latitude E4200 laptops. Some of these are running 32-bit Windows XP SP3, some of them are running 32-bit Windows 7, some are running 64-bit Windows 7. All the laptops are identical, having come from the same order. Out of these the Windows 7 (32 and 64-bit) report that the hardware is 64-bit capable, and the Windows XP machines report that they're only 32-bit capable. Does anyone know if there's another value I can query to get the hardware's capabilities correctly on XP, or is there a hotfix that will get it reporting the correct info?

    Read the article

  • Minecraft shows black screen on watt-os 64 after logon

    - by uffe hellum
    Minecraft appears to launch with oracle java 7, but crashes after logon. $ java -Xmx1024M -Xms512M -cp ./minecraft.jar net.minecraft.LauncherFrame asdf Exception in thread "Thread-3" java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: /home/uffeh/.minecraft/bin/natives/liblwjgl.so: /home/uffeh/.minecraft/bin/natives/liblwjgl.so: wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS32 (Possible cause: architecture word width mismatch) at java.lang.ClassLoader$NativeLibrary.load(Native Method) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadLibrary1(ClassLoader.java:1939) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadLibrary0(ClassLoader.java:1864) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadLibrary(ClassLoader.java:1825) at java.lang.Runtime.load0(Runtime.java:792) at java.lang.System.load(System.java:1059) at org.lwjgl.Sys$1.run(Sys.java:69) at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) at org.lwjgl.Sys.doLoadLibrary(Sys.java:65) at org.lwjgl.Sys.loadLibrary(Sys.java:81) at org.lwjgl.Sys.(Sys.java:98) at net.minecraft.client.Minecraft.F(SourceFile:1857) at aof.(SourceFile:20) at net.minecraft.client.Minecraft.(SourceFile:77) at anw.(SourceFile:36) at net.minecraft.client.MinecraftApplet.init(SourceFile:36) at net.minecraft.Launcher.replace(Launcher.java:136) at net.minecraft.Launcher$1.run(Launcher.java:79)

    Read the article

  • Sound and Video Skips on Ubuntu 11.10 64 bit

    - by Timothy LaFontaine
    I preformed a dist-upgrade from 11.04 to 11.10 and now I can not listen to any music or sounds (log on sound included), nor watch video without it stopping and then catching up and stopping again (This is flash or .mp4 through VLC). I did not have this issue with 11.04 and have even just preformed a fresh install of my system. I have tried to reinstall Pulse Audio and removing the .pulse folder but to no avail. Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Can't install Skype In Ubuntu 64 bit

    - by Huei
    I can't download skype, is skype currently not available for ubuntu linux 64bit 12.10? 1.dowload skype in official website 2.import canonical repo The following packages have unmet dependencies: skype:Depends: skype-bin but it is no going to be installed this problem exists,what is skype-bin ? even i can't download it (sudo apt-get install skype-bin E: Package 'skype-bin' has no installation candidate

    Read the article

  • Error installing Windows7 64 bits on VirtualBox

    - by MetaDark
    I am trying to set up Windows in Virtual Box, so I don't need to reboot in the rare occasion that I actually need it. The problem is, Virtual Box doesn't preform any errors when I insert the 32bit installation CD but when I try to use the 64bit installation; What!? I am already using the installation disc! I've checked my BIOS to see if I have SVM (AMD's version of VT) disabled and all I see is "Enabled" I have a K9N6PGM2-V2 motherboard A Triple Core AMD Athlon II A Nvdia NForce 430 integrated graphics card 4GB of RAM An 80GB IDE And a 1TB SATA I don't think the last three specifications matter but just in case XP I am pretty sure the CD isn't broken ( I am going to make sure in just a moment ), what could be the cause to this problem? Edit: The 64bit installation CD is not broken, but I found out when trying to install from the 32bit version that it's trying to upgrade, not preform a fresh install - Odd.

    Read the article

  • Installing Skype on 12.04 64 bit causes errors

    - by Wolfy87
    Hi there I am trying to install Skype through apt-get but I am having some trouble. The Skype package depends on skype-bin which is not found in my list of packages. So when trying to install Skype I get the following error. $ sudo apt-get install skype Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: skype : Depends: skype-bin but it is not installable E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. Does anyone know why this might happen? Am I missing a repository? I get similar results when downloading the .deb from their site. But it complains about ai32-libs not being installable. This is because it depends on another package that does not exist in my list. Please bear in mind that this is a custom install from the company I work for. They have secured it and I think they have updated it over time and skipped versions, possibly breaking things.

    Read the article

  • Moving a LAMP set up from 32 bit to 64 bit

    - by user10157
    Hello everyone... I have setup an Ubuntu server 10.10 32bit on an old Dell D610 Laptop for testing. I have the latest PHP, MySQL and Apache with Wordpress installed. After the testing is over and once I finish adding material to my wordpress I will build a Ubuntu 10.10 64bit VM on Hyper-V. What I am wondering is , if it's best practice to build everything from scratch (which will take me more time and would like to avoid) or transfer the database and all other settings? If I choose to transfer how and what I need to do? Here's where I'd like some help as I am still an intermediate admin (If I can call it that!) I am looking forward for your help. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • I'm confuse about these 2 statements about performance of 32 bit application on 64 bit Windows 7....

    - by metal gear solid
    Running some 32 bit applications on a 64 bit OS could actually be slower. The additional overheads in running 32 bit software in 64 bit mode could cause a slight degradation in performance. It will take some time for 64 bit software to become the norm. Source: http://www.w7forums.com/windows-7-64-bit-vs-32-bit-t484.html That depends. If you're working with large files or running applications that consume a great deal of memory, then 64-bit Windows will typically give you a slight performance advantage over 32-bit Windows running on identical hardware. This is true even when using 32-bit applications. Source: http://www.infoworld.com/d/windows/32-bit-windows-7-or-64-bit-windows-7-145?page=0,3 Which is true? If i go for 64 bit Windows 7 then will i feel more performance (Compare to 32 bit windows 7) of 3 years back purchased Adobe photoshop (I think it would be a 32 bit application) and some of other 32 bit applications ?

    Read the article

  • How large is the performance loss for a 64-bit VirtualBox guest running on a 32-bit host?

    - by IllvilJa
    I have a 64-bit Virtualbox guest running Gentoo Linux (amd64) and it is currently hosted on a 32-bit Gentoo laptop. I've noticed that the performance of the VM is very slow compared to the performance of the 32-bit host itself. Also when I compare with another 32-bit Linux VM running on the same host, performance is significantly less on the 64-bit VM. I know that running a 64-bit VM on a 32-bit host does incur some performance penalties for the VM, but does anyone have any deeper knowledge of how large a penalty one might expect in this scenario, roughly speaking? Is a 10% slowdown something to expect, or should it be a slowdown in the 90% range (running at 1/10 the normal speed)? Or to phrase it in another way: would it be reasonable to expect that the performance improvement for the 64-bit VM increases so much that it is worth reinstalling the host machine to run 64-bit Gentoo instead? I'm currently seriously considering that upgrade, but am curious about other peoples experience of the current scenario. I am aware that the host OS will require more RAM when running in 64-bit, but that's OK for me. Also, I do know that one usually don't run a 64-bit VM on a 32-bit server (I'm surprised I even got the VM started in the first place) but things turned out that way when I tried to future proof the VM I was setting up and decided to make it 64-bit anyway.

    Read the article

  • Installing and using 32-bit software in 64-bit Linux

    - by Isxek
    Is there a way to install and run i386 software packages inside an AMD64 version of Xubuntu (v9.10)? Just to get an idea, how much effort would it require to port it to something usable within the said OS. I imagine it would be a lot. Thanks! If you need more info (specs, etc.) let me know.

    Read the article

  • 32-bit Ubuntu or 64-bit w/Intel Atom D510 w/4GB RAM?

    - by T.J. Crowder
    (I've seen this question and some related ones, and perhaps this is a duplicate although part of my question is specific to the Atom D510.) I'm going to be installing Ubuntu on a new silent desktop as my latest (and hopefully last) attempt to switch from Windows to Linux for at least most everyday tasks. The new machine is entirely passvely cooled, but as a consequence, not astonishingly powerful — an Atom D510 (dual-core, 1.6GHz, HT) on Intel's D510MO board. That's fine, I won't use it for gaming, (much) video editing, etc. It's a 64-bit processor and I'm maxing the board out at 4GB of RAM (hey, that 1.6 CPU needs all the help it can get), which naturally raises the question of whether to install Ubuntu 64-bit or 32-bit (and if the latter, either live with the missing RAM, or do the PAE kernel dance). Although I've used Linux on servers for years, I'm very nearly a Linux desktop newbie and am not currently in the mood to fight driver wars and such. So if I'm setting myself up for failure with 64-bit, I'll live with the missing ~0.8GB or fiddle with PAE. But if 64-bit is entirely "ready," great, I'm there. So: Do most mainstream apps (now) play nicely with 64-bit Linux? I can't help but notice the "AMD" in the ISO image filename ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso and I know AMD lead the way on this stuff — does Ubuntu 64-bit play nicely with Intel processors? Just generally, would you recommend one or the other? (And if anyone has any experience with Ubuntu specifically on the D510 [32-bit or 64-bit] which might lead me one way or t'other, that would be useful.) Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Why does Ubuntu Download recommend 32-bit install?

    - by Warren Pena
    The Ubuntu desktop download screen has a pair of radio buttons you use to select whether you wish to download the 32-bit or 64-bit version. The 64-bit version is labeled "Not recommended for daily desktop usage." If you have a 64-bit processor, why would you not want to use the 64-bit version of Ubuntu? Update for 10.10: They've removed the "Not recommended" label from the 64-bit version and added a "Recommended" label to the 32-bit version. Update for 11.04: Same as 10.10. Update for 12.04: Still says "Recommended" next to 32-bit version of desktop

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

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