Mike,

On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 04:24:23PM -0500, Mike Miller wrote:
>> If you install Ubuntu/Debian AMD64, then all you get is 64-bit compiled 
>> binaries.  If you want to run 32-bit applications, you need to install the 
>> ia32-libs package.
>>
>> Fedora AMD64 by default installs a large number of 32-bit libraries, so 
>> you can run your old binaries without too much trouble.
>
> That's a big help, thanks!  I thought the 32-bit apps could run on the 
> 64-bit OS but I didn't know about the library issue.
>
> If I were using apt-get, would it notify me if the app I was downloading 
> was a 32-bit version?

I don't think it would explicitly.  It might drop subtle hints, such
as asking you if you want to install ia32-libs (unless you already
have it), or show you the package names which would contain i386
instead of amd64.

>>> I'll also have to make sure that Oracle will run on that system before I 
>>> buy it (I think I mentioned before that I'm stuck in Oracle world for now 
>>> but may go to PostgreSQL someday).
>>
>> Oracle has a 64-bit versions for most of the supported platforms, 
>> including Linux.  With Oracle (and most proprietary packages) it might be 
>> easier to use Centos/OpenSuse since the instructions will probably be 
>> tailored to RedHat and Suse.
>
> Right -- I have seen info about their connection to RHEL.  I'll be doing 
> some more analysis to figure out what distro will be best for me.  I've 
> been using RHEL for years and Ubuntu for a few months and Ubuntu seems to 
> be a lot easier for me.  I like apt-get, for one.  RHEL software is often 
> way out of date.

You mean "stable", right?

> Regarding basic stability of the system:  I wonder if there are any 
> differences among the distros.  They may have the same kernel and most of 
> the same libraries, so what are the important differences?

RedHat performs more 'internal' testing of the bits before putting
them on a shiny disk and charging money for it.  They also have some
number of sales suits which talk the sweet talk to other suits, making
them fuzzy and willing to part with cash.  Seriously, through their
direct support of Linux development, training and certification
program, business deals, and longer history, they look more polished
and professional than Ubuntu.  Novell/Suse are in their own bubble.

'same kernel and libraries' is a really fuzzy concept.  Is 2.6.18 the
same kernel as 2.6.19?  Is 2.6.18 the same as 2.6.18+three patches?
Is 2.6.18 the same if two people configure it from scratch, enabling
different options?

>                                                              What 
> differences would affect functioning of Oracle or the Oracle installation 
> process?

The instructions might refer to files paths that you don't have or
installation scripts might try to modify the 'wrong' files.  And if
you call Oracle, for support, you might be refused on the grounds of
not using a 'supported' configuration.  That's why I suggested Centos,
because it is as close to RHEL as possible.

> Do the newest versions of these distros conform to Linux Standard Base 
> (LSB)?  If so, doesn't that make them much more alike than they used to be?

Yes, they do contain the LSB compatibility packages.  The problem is that
the vendors test against well-known versions of well-known commercial
distributions, and not against LSB.

Cheers,
florin

-- 
Bruce Schneier expects the Spanish Inquisition.
      http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/fact/163
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20081001/f1ba55e6/attachment.pgp