PDA

View Full Version : 64 bit installation shows up as 32 bit


nikhilpatwardhan
October 5th, 2011, 10:51 AM
Hi,

I installed 64 bit Ubuntu (Windows installer) on two machines with Intel Pentium-R E 5700 dual core processor. On one of the machines, when do a uname -a post installation, I can see x86-64. However, on the other machine with the same CPU, it shows i686, which I guess, means that a 32 bit version has been installed. This baffles me as i sued the same ISO image for installation(ubuntu-10.04.3-desktop-amd64.iso) on both machines. Am I missing something here?

Thanks
Nikhil
nikhilpatwardhan
October 5th, 2011, 11:11 AM
Fixed. My mistake. I was using the wrong ISO.
haqking
October 5th, 2011, 11:13 AM
Fixed. My mistake. I was using the wrong ISO.

make sure you mark the thread as solved.

cheers
450rOOST
October 6th, 2011, 02:28 AM
I am new to ubuntu and and about to download to a cd to try, it recommends 32 bit. Why is that? Would 64 not be faster? Sorry for my ignorance.
Bluesan
October 6th, 2011, 04:46 AM
I am new to ubuntu and and about to download to a cd to try, it recommends 32 bit. Why is that? Would 64 not be faster? Sorry for my ignorance.

If you take the time to read through the myriad of other threads on the forums discussing this, I think most of it had to do with flash issues.

However, a 64-bit version of flash is easy to get now, and it looks like it will be standard for 11.10.

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RestrictedFormats/Flash

https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/flashplugin-installer/+question/173230

Personally, my advice would be, if you have 64-bit architecture, install the 64-bit version of Ubuntu.

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/32bit_and_64bit

But, there's nothing wrong with staying with 32-bit. It'll run just fine on a 64-bit machine. It's up to you...
oldos2er
October 6th, 2011, 07:07 PM
None of it had to do with flash; the website maintainers (not the developers) assumed people downloading Ubuntu wouldn't know which architecture they would need, so they steered people toward 32-bit.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-website-content/+bug/585940?comments=all
Bluesan
October 7th, 2011, 05:30 AM
None of it had to do with flash; the website maintainers (not the developers) assumed people downloading Ubuntu wouldn't know which architecture they would need, so they steered people toward 32-bit.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-website-content/+bug/585940?comments=all

I stand corrected, thanks.
oldos2er
October 7th, 2011, 06:31 PM
No problem.