What flavor of Linux do you recommend for 64 bit coding?

[Eccentro]

I'm trying to use the 64 bit beta of Gnome 3 / OpenSUSE, but it's giving my 585 a lot of trouble - especially with the date and time.  I had some kind of a file system error this morning - twice - while trying to get the clock set correctly.  It's just not ready for prime time yet.  I'm sure it will all be worked out by the anticipated release date - next month.

What's your preference?

[MJaoune]

By "flavor" you mean distro, right? Actually it doesn't differ, you can use any distro to assemble and link, even on a 64 bit system(for coding also). I use Fedora, with GNOME 3, Frank Kotler, he is a command-line man, so he uses Slackware Linux, so he doesn't have a GUI, unlike us noobs and he likes using Slackware (I think )

Choose the one you feel comfortable with, but keep an eye on if it updates recently or not, since it is recommended to use the latest GCC with its Linker ld, the distro should update gcc frequently.

Best,
Mahmoud

[Eccentro]

Thanks.  I have the Gnome 3 / Fedora release, too.  You're not having any trouble with it?

I'll try the Slackware, too.  I started out as a DOS man, so that would be almost full circle.  hehe.

I definitely want to write pure 64 bit code.  I'm all about that right now. 

Addendum:  I'm downloading the slackware64-13.37 iso presently.

[MJaoune]

Thanks.  I have the Gnome 3 / Fedora release, too.  You're not having any trouble with it?

No, not any trouble

I'll try the Slackware, too.  I started out as a DOS man, so that would be almost full circle.  hehe.

Good for you  And it is always positive to try something new

Addendum:  I'm downloading the slackware64-13.37 iso presently.

You may know that, but... be sure you have a 64 bit system for Slackware 64 to work, and please notice that the system type doesn't differ in programming, the code only differs if you are coding in 64 bit assembly, so you can compile a 64 bit code on a 32 bit Operating System, but ofcourse you can't execute the output.

I know that you knew that, but just in case you didn't, a human can make mistakes

Slackware's size is large But it worth it

Command-Line = x10 times faster than any GUI system, if not more than 10 times...

Best,
Mahmoud

[Eccentro]

Yeah - I knew that.  hehe.  Although you bring up a good point.  I could write the code on one of my other machines and test it on my Intel 585.

Someday, I'll get a faster computer than this Celeron, but, as you said, command-line operation is much faster than GUI and speed is good.  Especially in my field of interest, which is cognitive modeling.

I've got a lot of back burners going, so getting things done is becoming a priority.  hehe.

Thanks again for the help.

[Eccentro]

I'm stoked about the SlackWare.  I'm running the install now and I see that the iso came complete with the tools I'll need.  I can just add NASM go to it.

Good recommendation! 

[MJaoune]

I'm stoked about the SlackWare.  I'm running the install now and I see that the iso came complete with the tools I'll need.  I can just add NASM go to it.

Good recommendation! 

Nice But which Software Set have you downloaded?? or did you download the whole 4 GB Image!? I just want to know, since it works good for you. And actually Frank recommended Slackware for me

Someday, I'll get a faster computer than this Celeron, but, as you said, command-line operation is much faster than GUI and speed is good.  Especially in my field of interest, which is cognitive modeling.

If you use your computer for programming only, and no gaming, then you don't have to buy a fast PC.

I use my computer for programming only, no gaming and here is my system specs:
-Pentium 4 with Hyperthreading enabled.
-2 GB of Ram.
-Overclocked ATi Radeon 9550. (used to be 256 mb of vram without overclocking)

It is a desktop, and can run Pro evolution soccer 2010 smoothly But I don't play it.

Best,
Mahmoud

[Eccentro]

Yep.  I downloaded the 4+GB SlackWare 64bit iso and used a temporary install of Knoppix to burn it to a DVD.  Then I repartitioned the drive, using GParted, and ran the setup from the newly burned iso.

I'm currently looking for some quick tutorials to make the transition from the MSWorld easier.

I know that the writing of code is not that demanding, but the code that I write tends to be very much so - not that it's inefficient - quite the contrary - but a lot of it is heavy on real-time computation.  I'm always bumping up against the limits of the hardware and spend a lot of time and effort finding faster ways to do things, all the while maintaining the highest quality standards.

That's why I want to go 64bit.  Working with large tables of data and performing dsp ops on them is something that the 64bit instruction and register set is excellent at.  I got this computer on the cheap, but I got what I paid for.  A Celeron tends to come hobbled.  I'm wondering if I can upgrade the CPU.  I'll make due for now.

One reason that I needed NASM is that I can't add to the higher level languages in the MSWorld.  I tried their inline assembler and it sucked.

In the Linux environment, with this assembler and various languages and compilers, I can really work without proprietary limits.  I'll be free.    I can make my own tools.  I can make an OS.  I can make a language.  I can make a file system - or whatever.  It's my secret laboratory. 

Your PC's not bad at all.

I am a gamer, but I have another computer for that.  It's fast, but it's not portable.  I play Fallout 3, Fallout Vegas and Oblivion on it.  Skyrim's coming out soon.  I can't wait for that.

Wow.  I'm really rambling.  hehe.  Peace.

[Rob Neff]

I got this computer on the cheap, but I got what I paid for.  A Celeron tends to come hobbled.  I'm wondering if I can upgrade the CPU.  I'll make due for now.

If you're trying to do computation-heavy operations on a celeron there's a bridge in san francisco I want to sell you 

One reason that I needed NASM is that I can't add to the higher level languages in the MSWorld.  I tried their inline assembler and it sucked.

Forget inline assembly for x64 using VisualStudio.  MS killed that idea years ago.
 

In the Linux environment, with this assembler and various languages and compilers, I can really work without proprietary limits.  I'll be free.    I can make my own tools.  I can make an OS.  I can make a language.  I can make a file system - or whatever.  It's my secret laboratory. 

Take all those excellent ideas and apply that energy to any one ( or more ) of the current open source projects that could probably benefit from having you on board.

As for Linux distros, I'm fond of Fedora.  I even like the striped down look of Gnome 3.
I've been playing around with Scientific Linux ( a distro of RedHat's Enterprise Linux ) lately.

Oh, and welcome to our little family, sounds like you'll be here a while 

[MJaoune]

Forget inline assembly for x64 using VisualStudio.  MS killed that idea years ago.

MingW and all GCC compilers have the __asm(const char*) command, DJGPP uses AMD Syntax. Mingw uses Intel Syntax I think. And GCC Compilers are free and compatible with Linux! 

Oh, and welcome to our little family, sounds like you'll be here a while 

Yup, welcome Eccentro, we have the greatest family, right, brother Rob?

Edit: Inappropriate content removed by forum moderation.

[Eccentro]

Rob Neff,

  Actually, I was working in the 32bit domain when I was using that inline assembler and yes, that was years ago.  I'm still using VB6 32bit.  Why?  Because it still works.  hehe.  I'm switching to 64bit at the same time that I'm switching to Linux.

  I'll need to get a feel for things first, but then I'll be happy to contribute.  I've been working on a suite of apps for music and am leaning toward the idea of a Linux only release.  I need to see what audio services are provided by the kernel, but if I can, I probably will.  I'm currently working with DirectX on that.

MJaoune,

  I hope to get familiar with those tools, but I came up via Dos, Basic, QBasic, Windows and VB route.  It's like growing up in a different country.  I'll assimilate.  hehe.

Thank you both for the warm welcome.  That's something Microsoft never gave me.   

[Eccentro]

That reminds me.  I was wondering if anyone has made an app that can convert the source code over from a MS VS project (VB or VC++) to something convenient in the Linux dimension.

I'll eventually be able to do it by hand, but I wrote a lot of code.  It'll be a big job.  Maybe there's a short cut.  Besides, comparing the before and after would be a quick way to learn the conventions.

[MJaoune]

That reminds me.  I was wondering if anyone has made an app that can convert the source code over from a MS VS project (VB or VC++) to something convenient in the Linux dimension.

umm... Last time I checked, I didn't find a software that does this type of convertion, C++ is C++ and C is C, so you don't have to change the code, since all C and C++ compilers use the same syntax, you may only have to order and modify the VS files that  were created when the project was created, and you can also modify the makefiles if there were any.

Best,
MJaoune

Edit: Inappropriate content removed by forum moderation.

[Eccentro]

Yeah, the functions/modules will be that way, but I'm sure there will be differences between COM and whatever form of OOP is used in the Linux domain.  There are the API functions which will have to be replaced.  The more I think about it, the more I realize that I'll probably have to do a lot of it by hand.  It's ok.  I'm overhauling it all anyway.

[Rob Neff]

For a temporary test you can try running your win32 apps in Wine.
Trying to convert apps from Win32 to Linux is not the way to go.
Very little code will port from Windows to native Linux.
I too used to use VisualStudio products up to and including VS2005 with inlined assembly.
That is until I ran into the x64 issues, the horrible mess that masm is, and my newfound love affair with Nasm began.