Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by phenom | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

phenom

You should probably stay on 2.2 beta....

1. Skype 4 require download 95 additional packages for ubuntu version (all marked i386 even if you using amd64)

2. I am not sure but giant ads probably included too [1]

[1] http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/skype-...

View on HN

It's actually a 32-bit binary, so the amd64 debian package just lists all the i386 dependencies explicitly. Bummer.

$ file /usr/bin/skype /usr/bin/skype: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.15, BuildID[sha1]=0x3223447b98867e62fbed258aa0da4f2281ab6f11, stripped

On Fedora (17 here, 32 bits) replaces the old package without installing any extra stuff.

I haven't tested it deeply, but looks like runs smoother than the previous (quite unstable) version.

The point was that skype has no x86_64 version. So if you have a 64 bit install (random aside: I hope you're on an Atom netbook and not running a 32 bit linux on a desktop/laptop) it will pull all the i686 versions of its dependencies.

This probably works now on Ubuntu, which has finally rolled out a multilib implementation (that I haven't kicked the tires on yet).

This a i3 M370, but I run a 32 bits OS because I got tired of running 64 bits with applications with no support for 64 bits (read: Flash browser plugin and Skype).

After some time I've found that there's no real advantage for me on a 64 bits OS for a laptop (ie. I have only 3GB of RAM, performance looks the same, etc).

Flash has been X86_64 compatible for a while now...

  sh-4.2$ rpm -q flash-player
  flash-player-11.2.202.236-91.1.x86_64

(rpm query on openSUSE Tumbleweed)

  sh-4.2$ file /usr/lib64/browser-plugins/libflashplayer.so
  /usr/lib64/browser-plugins/libflashplayer.so: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, stripped

Choppy sound (if not completely broken depending on the audio codec), crashes (I got core dumps daily), absurd CPU usage and made Firefox unstable.

I'm not a heavy flash user, but after 6 months I was really frustrated. The 32 bits version works great in comparison.

I apologize for the digression, but what's wrong with running 32bit linux on a desktop/laptop?

Apart from it being a measurably slower architecture (15-20% is typical) and the only sane way of dealing with large memory machines? (Laptops with 8G are routine today, and require a PAE kernel on i686). Refusing to upgrade is the reason that products like Skype continue to refuse to support 64 bit targets.

Just try it. Chances are you won't even notice the difference, except that your battery will last a tiny bit longer if you do compute-heavy stuff.

Tried it couple years ago and the only thing I noticed was that it used more memory (almost twice as much as 32bit IIRC). So I returned to 32bit and am still using it, with PAE kernel so I can use all 4 gigs that I have right now. I really don't feel a bit responsible because Skype refuses to support 64bit.

Another reason that I keep 32bit is portability, as I have quite a peculiar setup: I keep my Linux on a removable HDD, and boot off it on several different machines, which may or may not support 64bit. (So I don't have to tow my laptop to work and back every day.)

You can run a 64 bit kernel, with a 32 bit userspace BTW, this lets you access all the memory on your machine.

Personally I'm waiting for debian multiarch to switch, since I have no desire to reinstall everything from scratch. If debian multiarch did not exist I might have bitten the bullet, but since it does, I can wait a bit for it.

Of course. Even better (best of both worlds, really) would be to run a 64 bit kernel with an x32 userspace: https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/

But those are still bleeding edge options for people comfortable with tinkering with their systems. I was speaking to the simple choice of i686 vs. x86_64 in pre-cooked systems.

This may surprise you, but every laptop and desktop that I own has a 32-bit processor in it.

How many years has it been since AMD released the Hammer architecture? There was actually a recent post on the LKML that mentioned this.

http://lwn.net/Articles/501769/

At this point, I see no reason to run a pure 32 bit userspace. There are no real advantages. The performance impacts are minor, and most people are over 4 GB (or should be).

As to your point 2, I've heard multiple times now that this Linux version does not include the in-conversation ads.

I'm on Arch Linux and installing skype4 from AUR has no dependencies that the skype package from multilib didn't...

Must just be Ubuntu ^.^

The new version of skype is in the official repositories. Just installed it and it looks good so far.

that and the fact that Arch rocks!

On Ubuntu the dependencies were already installed by the old version, so I could install this new version without anything else required.

My old amd64 version do not require that much dependencies only coupe of packages... and thats it..

Here list of my dependencies for skype 4:

bluez-alsa:i386 glib-networking:i386 gstreamer0.10-plugins-good:i386 gstreamer0.10-x:i386 gtk2-engines:i386 gtk2-engines-murrine:i386 gtk2-engines-oxygen:i386 gtk2-engines-pixbuf:i386 ia32-libs ia32-libs-multiarch:i386 ibus-gtk:i386 lib32asound2 lib32gcc1 lib32stdc++6 libaa1:i386 libaio1:i386 libao4:i386 libatk1.0-0:i386 libaudiofile1:i386 libavc1394-0:i386 libc6-i386 libcaca0:i386 libcairo-gobject2:i386 libcairo2:i386 libcanberra-gtk-module:i386 libcanberra-gtk0:i386 libcanberra0:i386 libcap2:i386 libcroco3:i386 libcupsimage2:i386 libcurl3:i386 libdbus-glib-1-2:i386 libdv4:i386 libesd0:i386 libgail-common:i386 libgail18:i386 libgconf-2-4:i386 libgdbm3:i386 libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0:i386 libgettextpo0:i386 libgnome-keyring0:i386 libgomp1:i386 libgtk2.0-0:i386 libgudev-1.0-0:i386 libibus-1.0-0:i386 libidn11:i386 libiec61883-0:i386 libjasper1:i386 libmad0:i386 libmikmod2:i386 libnspr4:i386 libnss3:i386 libodbc1:i386 libpango1.0-0:i386 libpixman-1-0:i386 libproxy1:i386 libpulse-mainloop-glib0:i386 libpulsedsp:i386 libqt4-designer:i386 libqt4-opengl:i386 libqt4-qt3support:i386 libqt4-scripttools:i386 libqt4-svg:i386 libqt4-test:i386 libqtwebkit4:i386 libraw1394-11:i386 librsvg2-2:i386 librsvg2-common:i386 librtmp0:i386 libsdl-image1.2:i386 libsdl-mixer1.2:i386 libsdl-net1.2:i386 libsdl-ttf2.0-0:i386 libsdl1.2debian:i386 libshout3:i386 libsoup-gnome2.4-1:i386 libsoup2.4-1:i386 libspeex1:i386 libssl0.9.8:i386 libstdc++5:i386 libtag1-vanilla:i386 libtag1c2a:i386 libtdb1:i386 libunistring0:i386 libvorbisfile3:i386 libwavpack1:i386 libxaw7:i386 libxcb-render0:i386 libxcb-shm0:i386 libxft2:i386 libxmu6:i386 libxp6:i386 libxtst6:i386 odbcinst1debian2:i386 xaw3dg:i386

Yeah, I forgot to tell that I'm using the Ubuntu x86 version, not the x64 one.

Maybe you should consider that a Ubuntu problem...I use Arch and only one additional package is required.

Debian 6.0.5 installed without any additional packages also, it was a straight replace.

edit: amd64

Reply on news.ycombinator.com