ARM64 vs AMD64

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

ARM64 vs AMD64

ubuntu-users mailing list
Hi all

Excuse my (Monday morning) stupid question, I was just about to download the
(Desktop) iso's for Ubuntu:-

20.04.1
20.10
21.04

I noted that the iso's for 21.04 were for ARM64/AARCH64 no other iso (yet?) can
I still use on a plain AMD64, or wait on an AMD64 iso?

be kind it's Monday (and the iso is 2.7gb so a waste if it aint gonna work)





--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

ubuntu-users mailing list
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 12:57:20 -0000, Grizzly via ubuntu-users wrote:
>ARM64/AARCH64

You need AMD64/x86_64 architecture. ARM64/AARCH64 is for different CPU
based machines.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

Robert Heller
In reply to this post by ubuntu-users mailing list
At Mon, 09 Nov 2020 12:57:20 -0000 "Ubuntu user technical support,  not for general discussions" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hi all
>
> Excuse my (Monday morning) stupid question, I was just about to download the
> (Desktop) iso's for Ubuntu:-
>
> 20.04.1
> 20.10
> 21.04
>
> I noted that the iso's for 21.04 were for ARM64/AARCH64 no other iso (yet?) can
> I still use on a plain AMD64, or wait on an AMD64 iso?

ARM64/AARCH64 is a completely different processor from AMD64 (aka x86_64). The
ARM processor family is completely unrelated to the x86 family -- the AMD64 is
AMD's 64-bit extension of the Intel x86, which Intel adopted and calls x86_64.
My guess is that the AMD64 ISOs for 21.04 have not been spun up yet. Isn't it
a bit early for the 21.04 release anyway? Maybe the 21.04 ARM64/AARCH64 are
some sort of early (Alpha? Beta?) release? Given that the ARM chips are the
chips in embeded Linux / Internet of things / appliance and often have various
sorts of bleeding edge hardware, including all sorts of SOC "goodies" (on
"chip" I/O features: UARTS, CAN, SPI, I2C, PWM, GPIO, CSI, etc.) it is not
really suprising that an early release is available.

>
> be kind it's Monday (and the iso is 2.7gb so a waste if it aint gonna work)
>
>
>
>
>

--
Robert Heller             -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364
Deepwoods Software        -- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Linux Administration Services
[hidden email]       -- Webhosting Services
                                           

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

Liam Proven
In reply to this post by ubuntu-users mailing list
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 13:58, Grizzly via ubuntu-users
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> 21.04

Doesn't exist yet.

Look at the year. The first 2 digits are the year of release. Check
your calendar.

Don't run pre-release software if you want a comfy life.

--
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

Oliver Grawert
In reply to this post by ubuntu-users mailing list
hi,
Am Montag, den 09.11.2020, 12:57 +0000 schrieb Grizzly via ubuntu-
users:

> I noted that the iso's for 21.04 were for ARM64/AARCH64 no other iso
> (yet?)

as others noted, arm64 is a completely different CPU architecture and
the isos will not run on x86 (intel) based systems ...

hirsute (to become 21.04) only opened very very recently, a massive
import of packages from debian is currently going on. pulling in all
imaginable breakage from debian unstable. even if there are isos, do
not expect them to work at all, using installation images before the
first alpha release is (unless you are a developer that wants o fix
issues with the images themselves) usually a pointless effort ... stay
with 20.04/20.10 ...

ciao
        oli

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

signature.asc (201 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

ubuntu-users mailing list
In reply to this post by Liam Proven
09 November 2020  at 14:20, Liam Proven wrote:
Re: ARM64 vs AMD64 (at least in part)

>On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 13:58, Grizzly via ubuntu-users
><[hidden email]> wrote:

>> 21.04

>Doesn't exist yet.

>Look at the year. The first 2 digits are the year of release. Check
>your calendar.

>Don't run pre-release software if you want a comfy life.

Always have had (at least) one (more for LTS versions) box running the daily
release iso, over time the number will drop as the spec required goes up :-<)
my fav carry around Netbook is stuck on 18.04.5 as it's 32bit, runs great and
have 3 more years (support) to enjoy it, I still run 16.04.6 on one box (until
next April) Even PuppyLinux has gone 64bit only



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

ubuntu-users mailing list
In reply to this post by Robert Heller
09 November 2020  at 8:17, Robert Heller wrote:
Re: ARM64 vs AMD64 (at least in part)


>My guess is that the AMD64 ISOs for 21.04 have not been spun up yet. Isn't it
>a bit early for the 21.04 release anyway? Maybe the 21.04 ARM64/AARCH64 are
>some sort of early (Alpha? Beta?) release?

Each bew release has daily's soon after the last version comes out. nothing
much new in them, but they get more new features over time, not always stable
though, I'll wait on an AMD64 iso

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

Colin Watson
On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 01:50:26PM -0000, Grizzly via ubuntu-users wrote:
> Each bew release has daily's soon after the last version comes out. nothing
> much new in them, but they get more new features over time, not always stable
> though, I'll wait on an AMD64 iso

If you want to run pre-release hirsute and are willing to accept the
breakage, there's really no need to wait for an installable image.  It's
simpler and faster to just upgrade to it.

--
Colin Watson (he/him)                              [[hidden email]]

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

Liam Proven
In reply to this post by ubuntu-users mailing list
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 14:41, Grizzly via ubuntu-users
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Always have had (at least) one (more for LTS versions) box running the daily
> release iso,

Why? I'm just curious.

> over time the number will drop as the spec required goes up :-<)

What number?

> my fav carry around Netbook is stuck on 18.04.5 as it's 32bit, runs great and
> have 3 more years (support) to enjoy it, I still run 16.04.6 on one box (until
> next April)

OK. I kinda wish I'd left my main 16.04 workhorse on that and not
upgraded to 18.04 until I needed to, to be fair. I got nothing I
needed, it got slower, needed a lot of manual coaxing, and  I have a
copy of GNOME I don't want and can't uninstall.

But there are other 32-bit distros.
Debian, Arch, Slackware, all support x86.-32.
For mainstream graphical desktops, Mageia and Raspberry Pi Desktop both do.
I think LMDE does, as well.
In more niche distros, there are many, but I have a box running MX
Linux, for instance.

> Even PuppyLinux has gone 64bit only

Has it? Since when? I thought it died and was shut down years ago. The
website has even gone AFAICS.

--
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

ubuntu-users mailing list
09 November 2020  at 17:41, Liam Proven wrote:
Re: ARM64 vs AMD64 (at least in part)

>On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 14:41, Grizzly via ubuntu-users
><[hidden email]> wrote:

>> Always have had (at least) one (more for LTS versions) box running the daily
>> release iso,

>Why? I'm just curious.

Why what, why run the next version, or why run more boxes with next LTS? I
admit that since the move to Gnome from Unity (ok Unity is sort of still
possible) I guess I want to get used to it before I need to have it, and maybe
see whats new, I do like 16.04 and will miss it when support stops, not that I
need to stop using, I think I have a 14.04.5 somewhere

>> over time the number will drop as the spec required goes up :-<)

>What number?

I'd say half my flock will not get to 20.04, moving forward who can tell, min
Ram has doubled

>> my fav carry around Netbook is stuck on 18.04.5 as it's 32bit, runs great and
>> have 3 more years (support) to enjoy it, I still run 16.04.6 on one box (until
>> next April)
>
>OK. I kinda wish I'd left my main 16.04 workhorse on that and not
>upgraded to 18.04 until I needed to, to be fair. I got nothing I
>needed, it got slower, needed a lot of manual coaxing, and  I have a
>copy of GNOME I don't want and can't uninstall.

I made that move (on Netbook) to see "if" it would work, and hoped that 18.04
to 20.04 would also work (WRONG) I'm slowly getting the boxes with non-LTS
versions to either an LTS release or the latest (supported ) non-LTS, I have
very slow broadband so it takes time

>But there are other 32-bit distros.
>Debian, Arch, Slackware, all support x86.-32.
>For mainstream graphical desktops, Mageia and Raspberry Pi Desktop both do.
>I think LMDE does, as well.
>In more niche distros, there are many, but I have a box running MX
>Linux, for instance.

>> Even PuppyLinux has gone 64bit only

And Tails also 64 only since v3.xx ;-<)

>Has it? Since when?

I think it went 64 only when Ubunto went the same way,  i.e. BionicPup was last
that could be 32bit and that works well

>I thought it died and was shut down years ago. The
>website has even gone AFAICS.

No it's still here

http://puppylinux.com/

Given that Puppy is based on LTS versions of Ubuntu, (RaspPup ?)  new versions
are only every two years

Ubuntu Focal 64 x86_64 64-bit FossaPup64 9.5
Raspbian Buster armhf 32-bit Raspup 8.2.1
Ubuntu Bionic x86 32-bit BionicPup32 8.0
Ubuntu Bionic 64 x86_64 64-bit BionicPup64 8.0
Ubuntu Xenial x86 32-bit XenialPup 7.5
Ubuntu Xenial 64 x86_64 64-bit XenialPup64 7.5
Slackware 14.1 x86 32-bit SlackoPuppy 6.3.2
Slackware64 14.1 x86_64 64-bit Slacko64Puppy 6.3.2
Ubuntu Trusty x86 32-bit Tahrpup 6.0.5
Ubuntu Trusty 64 x86_64 64-bit Tahrpup64 6.0.5



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

Tom H-4
In reply to this post by ubuntu-users mailing list
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 1:58 PM Grizzly via ubuntu-users
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Excuse my (Monday morning) stupid question, I was just about to
> download the (Desktop) iso's for Ubuntu:-
>
> 20.04.1
> 20.10
> 21.04
>
> I noted that the iso's for 21.04 were for ARM64/AARCH64 no other
> iso (yet?) can I still use on a plain AMD64, or wait on an AMD64
> iso?

Where are you looking for 21.04?

It's here

https://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily-live/current/

Scroll down.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

ubuntu-users mailing list
09 November 2020  at 19:56, Tom H wrote:
Re: ARM64 vs AMD64 (at least in part)

>On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 1:58 PM Grizzly via ubuntu-users
><[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Excuse my (Monday morning) stupid question, I was just about to
>> download the (Desktop) iso's for Ubuntu:-
>>
>> 20.04.1
>> 20.10
>> 21.04
>>
>> I noted that the iso's for 21.04 were for ARM64/AARCH64 no other
>> iso (yet?) can I still use on a plain AMD64, or wait on an AMD64
>> iso?
>
>Where are you looking for 21.04?
>
>It's here
>
>https://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily-live/current/

>Scroll down.

Exactly where I was, and there is only one 21.04iso file, a lot of 20.10 though

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

Tom H-4
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 10:28 PM Grizzly via ubuntu-users
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> 09 November 2020  at 19:56, Tom H wrote:
>>
>> It's here
>>
>> https://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily-live/current/
>
>> Scroll down.
>
> Exactly where I was, and there is only one 21.04iso file, a lot of
> 20.10 though

Oops. Sorry.

https://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily-live/20201109/

Something must be wring with "current" today (?).

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

Liam Proven
In reply to this post by ubuntu-users mailing list
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 19:08, Grizzly via ubuntu-users
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Why what, why run the next version, or why run more boxes with next LTS?

Huh?

You said 21.04. That is *not* an LTS. LTS releases are only on
even-numbered years.

> I
> admit that since the move to Gnome from Unity (ok Unity is sort of still
> possible) I guess I want to get used to it before I need to have it, and maybe
> see whats new, I do like 16.04 and will miss it when support stops, not that I
> need to stop using, I think I have a 14.04.5 somewhere

What's what the short-term releases are for, IMHO.

> I'd say half my flock will not get to 20.04, moving forward who can tell, min
> Ram has doubled

Er... OK. I mean, old RAM is cheap.

> I made that move (on Netbook) to see "if" it would work, and hoped that 18.04
> to 20.04 would also work (WRONG) I'm slowly getting the boxes with non-LTS
> versions to either an LTS release or the latest (supported ) non-LTS, I have
> very slow broadband so it takes time

It used to be possible to upgrade from the "alternate" CD but I don't
think there is one any more.

You could run a local caching proxy. Something like IPCop makes that very easy.

> >I thought it died and was shut down years ago. The
> >website has even gone AFAICS.
>
> No it's still here
>
> http://puppylinux.com/

Which does not work. I _did_ check before I asked, you know. 403 error.

> Given that Puppy is based on LTS versions of Ubuntu, (RaspPup ?)  new versions
> are only every two years

The original Puppy isn't based off Ubuntu. Barry Kauler did do a test
build based off it, but the main distro was independent, AFAIK. He
retired in 2013:

http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/puppy-tahr/iso/tahrpup
-6.0-CE/release-Tahrpup-6.0.2-CE.htm

> Ubuntu Focal 64         x86_64 64-bit   FossaPup64 9.5
> Raspbian Buster         armhf 32-bit            Raspup 8.2.1
> Ubuntu Bionic           x86 32-bit              BionicPup32 8.0
> Ubuntu Bionic 64        x86_64 64-bit   BionicPup64 8.0
> Ubuntu Xenial           x86 32-bit              XenialPup 7.5
> Ubuntu Xenial 64        x86_64 64-bit   XenialPup64 7.5
> Slackware 14.1          x86 32-bit              SlackoPuppy 6.3.2
> Slackware64 14.1                x86_64 64-bit   Slacko64Puppy 6.3.2
> Ubuntu Trusty           x86 32-bit              Tahrpup 6.0.5
> Ubuntu Trusty 64        x86_64 64-bit   Tahrpup64 6.0.5

How odd. Someone else seems to be continuing with the same name. I did
not know, and to me, the website is dead. I wonder if whoever runs it
blocks the Czech Republic?


--
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

Liam Proven
In reply to this post by ubuntu-users mailing list
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 at 08:50, Grizzly <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Old Ram "maybe" cheap (some is not) but old Motherboards only allow so much,
> and old ram only comes in smaller sizes

Fair.

I have a Vaio P subnetbook that's maxed out at 2GB. I sold on my
Toshiba Satellite Pro A300 because while 4GB was cheap, 8GB of DDR was
going to cost roughly what the laptop did.

> >Which does not work. I _did_ check before I asked, you know. 403 error.
>
> I did_check_also (and downloaded FossaPup) before posting, the list I posted
> was a copy from there, I've just tested again and stll there (see attanch
> image)
>
> try
>
> https://www.isitdownrightnow.com/puppylinux.com.html
>
> it should show if a site is down (or unreachable local)

I tried such a site, too. The DNS record is there, it resolves, so it
said it was up. But the entire site just returns a 403 error, so it's
not _really_ up for me.

> >The original Puppy isn't based off Ubuntu. Barry Kauler did do a test
> >build based off it, but the main distro was independent, AFAIK. He
> >retired in 2013:
>
> I think that refers to the forking to Woof-CE from the Woof?

It's more general than that.

Puppy Linux was a 1-man project. The guy's name is Barry Kauler and he
built the whole distro single-handedly. He retired in 2013 and
announced that that was the end of the line for Puppy Linux.

He was a Win98 user and never saw the need for login security, which
is why Puppy Linux always ran as root and only root. That's why I did
not use Puppy Linux, even though otherwise I liked it.

But apparently the community forked the tool Kauler wrote to generate
Puppy builds from other distros, and they have continued.

For comparison:

"Corenomial", the sole maintainer of CrunchBang Linux -- a minimalist
distro I really liked -- quit. He said there was no point as modern
low-end hardware ran a full-fat distro well, IIRC.

He invited the community to continue, but not using the same name. It
did, as BunsenLabs Linux, which hewed very close to #!.

Then some _other_ community members forked it again, calling it
CrunchBang++. They made more dramatic improvements.

The BunsenLabs folks were aggrieved as they'd avoided the name
completely. CB++ did better as they were willing to make more drastic
changes.

BTW: both offer 32-bit versions.

Ah well. Here in the former Communist Bloc I am fairly accustomed to
sites refusing to serve me content. No big loss.


> Sorry to hear that can you run Tor or Tails to get around that?

Life's too short.

> The following section of this message contains a file attachment
> prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format.
> If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any other MIME-compliant system,
> you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer.
> If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance.
>
>    ---- File information -----------
>      File:  Image1.jpg
>      Date:  10 Nov 2020, 6:41
>      Size:  274228 bytes.
>      Type:  JPEG-image

Odd rider, but somehow it got through the mailing list. Yes, I see it. Ah well.

--
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ARM64 vs AMD64

ubuntu-users mailing list
In reply to this post by ubuntu-users mailing list
10 November 2020  at 13:26, Liam Proven wrote:
Re: ARM64 vs AMD64 (at least in part)

>On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 at 08:50, Grizzly <[hidden email]> wrote:

>I have a Vaio P subnetbook that's maxed out at 2GB.

My Samsung Netbook is in the same place one 2Gb chip, My much older (but 64
bit) Compaq tops out at 1Gb (2x500Mb) when I can find DDR for it, I offered to
swap bigger DDR2 or DDR3 stick for stick and still could not find a taker  

>I sold on my Toshiba Satellite Pro A300 because while 4GB was cheap, 8GB of
>DDR was going to cost roughly what the laptop did.

>>>Which does not work. I _did_ check before I asked, you know. 403 error.

>> I did_check_also (and downloaded FossaPup) before posting, the list I
>>posted was a copy from there, I've just tested again and stll there (see
>>attanch image)

Just tested both Bionic & Fossa (should be called Focal?) Pups live, from those

iso's, I love the FossaPup wallpaper, will try to lift for my full fat Focal
box(s) am having problems with Kaffeine deps on FossaPup (not tried it on
BionicPup yet)  

>I tried such a site, too. The DNS record is there, it resolves, so it said it
>was up. But the entire site just returns a 403 error, so it's not _really_ up
>for me.

>Ah well. Here in the former Communist Bloc I am fairly accustomed to sites
>refusing to serve me content. No big loss.

I had the same problems, been in UK, which USA sites treat as EU (lets hope
:->), so when the cookie rules thing was big news most US sites said "we're not

going to obay EU rules, so we will block all EU users"  



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users