Search Results

Search found 33496 results on 1340 pages for '32 vs 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 4/1340 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • What version was installed? x64 or i686? What's the difference exactly?

    - by Seppo
    Okay, so heres my problem. I recently started migrating several services to individual VMs on my box, using VirtualBox 4.1. I created a new VirtualBox VM with guest type "Ubuntu (64 Bit)". I've already done this before and it worked like a charm. I then installed unbutu server (12.04) from the exact same dvd image. All the time I thought that it should have installed x64. I already put a few hours work into the new VM, migrating the webserver and mail system etc. Today I tried installing a x64 piece of software and it suddenly told me that it needed x64 and I had only i686. I checked uname -a and this is what it gave me: Linux hostname 3.2.0-29-generic-pae #46-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jul 27 17:25:43 UTC 2012 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux Any guesses what went wrong? All the time I was thinking I had a x64 system. Any way to move to a "real" x64? I have a second VM on this host which is running x64 just fine .. P.S.: grep --color=always -iw lm /proc/cpuinfo returns lm among the flags.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 x64. Some 32 bit applications refuse to install.

    - by user250712
    I have been having problems lately when trying to install older games onto my PC. It is only with 32 bit applications. A few games that will not install are: Drakan: Order Of The Flame TA Kingdoms (Total Annihilation installed fine) Baldur's Gate. In Baldur's Gate, when I use autorun.exe and choose install, the autorun closes and the computer loads for a second (as it should) then nothing pops up. Ten minutes later still nothing, so I try again, still nothing. So next I use Setup.exe. Still nothing. I run it in every compatibility mode, and as Administrator in every mode, still nothing. Then I open Task Manager, and there are about 80 setup.exe processes running, all of them doing nothing and taking up next to no resources.

    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

  • Can't boot Ubuntu 12.10 32 or 64 Bit, only Ubuntu 12.04 32 Bit [closed]

    - by Alexander
    Possible Duplicate: My computer boots to a black screen, what options do I have to fix it? i tried to install Ubuntu 12.04 64Bit, 12.10 32 and 64Bit, but it doesn't work. I'm used the Ubuntu 12.04 32Bit Start Disc Creator and also Unetboot on Win7, the installation-process are finished and i restart without the Stick. I can choose for example 12.10 and it starts writing "start ... [OK], ...", but then it hangs most on "Stop Kernel Messages [OK]". Then i can only shutdown normal the system and it writes stopping, shutdown and something like that. I am use an Aspire One D270 Netbook with Intel Atom N2600. It also doesn't work to try Ubuntu 12.10 from running on USB Stick. It starts, but then its black and the cursor blink on the left upside. Please can you help me? :(

    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

  • Enabling 32-Bit Applications on IIS7 (also affects 32-bit oledb or odbc drivers) [Solved]

    - by Humprey Cogay, C|EH
    We just bought a new Web Server, after installing Windows 2008 R2(which is a 64bit OS and IIS7), SQL Server Standard 2008 R2 and IBM Client Access for V5R3 with its Dot Net Data Providers, I tried deploying our new project which is fully functional on an IIS6 Based Web Server, I encountered this Error The 'IBMDA400.DataSource.1' provider is not registered on the local machine. To remove the doubt that I still lack some Software Pre-Requesites or version conflicts  since I encountered some erros while installing my IBM Client Access, I created a Connection Tester which is Windows App that accepts a connection string as a parameter and verifies if that parameter is valid. After entering the Proper Conn String I tried hitting the button and the Test was Succesful. So now I trimmed my suspects to My Web App and IIS7. After Googling around I found this post by a Rakki Muthukumar(Microsoft Developer Support Engineer for ASP.NET and IIS7) http://blogs.msdn.com/b/rakkimk/archive/2007/11/03/iis7-running-32-bit-and-64-bit-asp-net-versions-at-the-same-time-on-different-worker-processes.aspx So I tried scouting on IIS7's management console and found this little tweak under the Application Pool where my App is a member of. After changing this parameter to TRUE Yahoo (although I'm a Google kind of person) the Web App Works .......

    Read the article

  • Cannot install Android 2.3 libs dies to missing ia32-libs-multiarch

    - by Enrique
    I need to get my box up to par or android development, but cannot get ia32-libs to install for the life of me. Can anyone help? The error Android's tool gave me was Stopping ADB server failed (code -1) and after a bit of investigation I found that I needed to install the ia32-libs which from my understanding is a pain. Ubuntu 12.04 (x64) xxx@xxx:~$ sudo apt-get -f install ia32-libs 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: ia32-libs : Depends: ia32-libs-multiarch E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.

    Read the article

  • Can aynone tell me what exactly 32bit/64bit and x86 and AMD64 have to do with the different choices on the download site of Ubuntu?

    - by Elysium
    SORRY for the newbie question, but I am still learning. I am wondering if x86 simply refers to the intel CPUs and AMD64 simply refers to the AMD CPUs? While....32bit and 64bit to the processor types? I was trying to download the intel 64bit version of the Ubuntu installer, but it wont give the option of x86 and AMD64....only the 32bit and 64bit can be chosen. Does this mean that someone with an Intel CPU and another person with an AMD CPU will download the same install file? (obviously depending on the bit version of their CPUs this might differ....but that's another thing).

    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

  • 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

  • .NET 3.5SP1 64-bit memory model vs. 32-bit memory model

    - by James Dunne
    As I understand it, the .NET memory model on a 32-bit machine guarantees 32-bit word writes and reads to be atomic operations but does not provide this guarantee on 64-bit words. I have written a quick tool to demonstrate this effect on a Windows XP 32-bit OS and am getting results consistent with that memory model description. However, I have taken this same tool's executable and run it on a Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit OS and am getting wildly different results. Both the machines are identical specs just with different OSes installed. I would have expected that the .NET memory model would guarantee writes and reads to BOTH 32-bit and 64-bit words to be atomic on a 64-bit OS. I find results completely contrary to BOTH assumptions. 32-bit reads and writes are not demonstrated to be atomic on this OS. Can someone explain to me why this fails on a 64-bit OS? Tool code: using System; using System.Threading; namespace ConsoleApplication1 { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var th = new Thread(new ThreadStart(RunThread)); var th2 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(RunThread)); int lastRecordedInt = 0; long lastRecordedLong = 0L; th.Start(); th2.Start(); while (!done) { int newIntValue = intValue; long newLongValue = longValue; if (lastRecordedInt > newIntValue) Console.WriteLine("BING(int)! {0} > {1}, {2}", lastRecordedInt, newIntValue, (lastRecordedInt - newIntValue)); if (lastRecordedLong > newLongValue) Console.WriteLine("BING(long)! {0} > {1}, {2}", lastRecordedLong, newLongValue, (lastRecordedLong - newLongValue)); lastRecordedInt = newIntValue; lastRecordedLong = newLongValue; } th.Join(); th2.Join(); Console.WriteLine("{0} =? {2}, {1} =? {3}", intValue, longValue, Int32.MaxValue / 2, (long)Int32.MaxValue + (Int32.MaxValue / 2)); } private static long longValue = Int32.MaxValue; private static int intValue; private static bool done = false; static void RunThread() { for (int i = 0; i < Int32.MaxValue / 4; ++i) { ++longValue; ++intValue; } done = true; } } } Results on Windows XP 32-bit: Windows XP 32-bit Intel Core2 Duo P8700 @ 2.53GHz BING(long)! 2161093208 > 2161092246, 962 BING(long)! 2162448397 > 2161273312, 1175085 BING(long)! 2270110050 > 2270109040, 1010 BING(long)! 2270115061 > 2270110059, 5002 BING(long)! 2558052223 > 2557528157, 524066 BING(long)! 2571660540 > 2571659563, 977 BING(long)! 2646433569 > 2646432557, 1012 BING(long)! 2660841714 > 2660840732, 982 BING(long)! 2661795522 > 2660841715, 953807 BING(long)! 2712855281 > 2712854239, 1042 BING(long)! 2737627472 > 2735210929, 2416543 1025780885 =? 1073741823, 3168207035 =? 3221225470 Notice how BING(int) is never written and demonstrates that 32-bit reads/writes are atomic on this 32-bit OS. Results on Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit: Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit Intel Core2 Duo P8700 @ 2.53GHz BING(long)! 2208482159 > 2208121217, 360942 BING(int)! 280292777 > 279704627, 588150 BING(int)! 308158865 > 308131694, 27171 BING(long)! 2549116628 > 2548884894, 231734 BING(int)! 534815527 > 534708027, 107500 BING(int)! 545113548 > 544270063, 843485 BING(long)! 2710030799 > 2709941968, 88831 BING(int)! 668662394 > 667539649, 1122745 1006355562 =? 1073741823, 3154727581 =? 3221225470 Notice that BING(long) AND BING(int) are both displayed! Why are the 32-bit operations failing, let alone the 64-bit ones?

    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

  • How do I can install libxcb-render-unil0?

    - by Nazar Kovalenko
    I need libxcb-render-unil0 for running DraftSight™ 32x ver under my 64x os. I was trying to install it by a terminal or Synaptic Package Manager but it I didn't succeed in this. root@nazar-Aspire-5720Z:/home/nazar# sudo apt-get install libxcb-render-unil0 Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done E: Unable to locate package libxcb-render-unil0 I just can't understand what's wrong. Thank u.

    Read the article

  • Google earth will not reinstall

    - by chad
    I was trying to perform the the fix found at this link http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/01/how-to-make-google-earth-look-native-in-ubuntu It requires you to delete certain files from the /opt/google/earth/free folder and then add some new ones that you download. I deleted the files but the links to download the new ones were unusable. I was using gksudo nautilus so trash was disabled meaning I could not restore the files I had deleted. I the tried to go to the Google Earth website and reinstall it. I downloaded the .deb but when I tried to install it it gav me an error message saying "cannot install ia32-libs" I tried installing this via terminal and it gave me an error message saying chad@chad-Lenovo-G570:~$ sudo apt-get install ia32-libs [sudo] password for chad: 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: ia32-libs : Depends: ia32-libs-multiarch E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. How do I fix this? Now I am stuck without a functioning Google Earth. How can I fix this?

    Read the article

  • Change /usr/lib to /usr/lib32 for eclipse to look for *.so files

    - by firen
    I am trying to run eclipse and I am getting: /usr/lib/gio/modules/libgvfsdbus.so: wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS64 Failed to load module: /usr/lib/gio/modules/libgvfsdbus.so I already found out that it is because this library is 64bits. I have found 32bit version of it and putted in subdirectory of /usr/lib32 but eclipse do not want to look for it there. How can I make it to look for libraries in /usr/lib32?

    Read the article

  • on install oracle jdk over ubuntu x86_64

    - by Richard
    my ubuntu version is 12.04, and when cat /proc/version, it shows Linux version 3.2.0-23-generic (buildd@crested) (gcc version 4.6.3 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.3-1ubuntu4) ) #36-Ubuntu SMP Tue Apr 10 20:39:51 UTC 2012 Linux yuzhe-HP 3.2.0-23-generic #36-Ubuntu SMP Tue Apr 10 20:39:51 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux When to install oracle jdk over linux, it presents with two options x86 and x64. Here it presents with x86_64. Which version should I choose and what the meaning behind x86_64 and x64.

    Read the article

  • Can a partition table be edited from a LiveUSB of another architecture?

    - by Eliran Malka
    My purpose is to re-partition a dual-boot machine (running Ubuntu 13.04 / Windows 7), i.e. the current table is as follows: ----------------------------------------------------------- | | extended partition | | | windows |--------------------------------| recovery | | (NTFS) | swap | filesystem | (NTFS) | | | (swap) | (ext4) | | ----------------------------------------------------------- and I want to create an additional ext4 partition under the extended partition, and mount those (the one I created and the 'filesystem' partition) to root and home (/ and /home), such as the new layout will be: ----------------------------------------------------------- | | extended partition | | | windows |--------------------------------| recovery | | (NTFS) | swap | root | home | (NTFS) | | | (swap) | (ext4) | (ext4) | | ----------------------------------------------------------- As the installations on the system and on my Live USB differ in architecture, I want to know: Is it safe to use a 64bit GParted from a Live USB for partitioning a 32bit installation?

    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

  • Unable to install Steam 64bit - Wrong architecture (Lubuntu 12.04)

    - by Ian
    I'm on a new install of Lubuntu 12.04 on an Acer Aspire 5534 (specifications here, tl;dr: AMD dual-core 64bit) trying to install steam_latest.deb from the Steam website. When I open gdebi to install, it tells me that it's uninstallable because it's for a i386 architecture. I've tried installing ia32-libs (installed, no success), gdebi --add-architecture i386 (with and without --force, command unknown). This is all I've found to fix the problem, but none of it has worked for me. Any suggestions are welcome, thanks for your time.

    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 >