Actually "IA-64" refers to Intel's Itanium architecture. What you really
want is an x86-64 or AMD64 Linux distribution. Additionally, the compiler
used on 64-bit Linux distributions are usually using at least gcc 3.3,
which compiles very well. Besides, since Povray 3.6, compiling your own
povray binary in 64-bit Linux (or other unix-like os) is as easy as
"./configure && make && make" install. Prior to that, eg 3.5, you needed to
modify a few of the source files.

"Mike C" <the### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> "Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
> > Okay, google doesn't seem to be able to give me any clear advice on this
> > one, so I'll ask you guys:
> >
> > I just bought an 64-bit AMD Turion based laptop, which irritatingly has
> > 32-bit windows installed, so I'm thinking about doing a dual-boot with linux
> > and using the 64-bit version of pov. I've already run a 32-bit test and my
> > laptop's almost as fast as my desktop machine, so I assume it will be faster
> > in 64-bit. Anyway what I want to know is this:
> >
> > 1/ what version of linux should I get?
>
> Just so you know - "standard" Linux (for i386 (a.k.a. IA-32)) will be 32-bit
> Linux, just like your Windows.  For Linux on 64-bit, you'll need a variant,
> e.g. a *SPECIAL* Linux for the so-called "IA-64" architechture (which means
> 64-bit processors).
>
> (That said, you'd also need a "special" Linux if you're using it on a mac.
> It's possible to run many linux apps on powerpc. :)
>
> I suggest the 64-bit (IA-64) version of Ubuntu, but it's really a matter of
> style.  Do you know anything about linux?  What do you want to get done
> (e.g. apart from POV-Ray)?  What do you need in your OS?  Editor? Web
> browsing? Multimedia? etc?
>
> Second preference would be Debian; as for the rest, I've heard that the
> packaging system can be troublesome, so use whatever works.  Also note that
> not all of the Linux distributions have 64-bit versions (it's possible, not
> everyone will make one though).  You might want to try one of those odd
> Linux-distro-chooser surveys.
>
> Also, a good many things are ... more complex in Linux.  More powerful too,
> but more complex anyways.  And if it doesn't work from the get-go, chances
> are, setting it up will be a pain or next-to impossible unless you can code
> the device driver yourself.
>
> Techincally Linux is just the kernel, all the apps run on it (e.g. X Windows
> System, Gnome/KDE/TWM/etc/, your app, pov-ray etc. etc.), although the
> generalization is there.  *shrugs*  Usually people don't really care though
> about that.
>
> > 2/ how much better is 64-bit pov compared to 32-bit on the same system?
> > (i.e. is it worth the effort?)
>
> A lot - but there is no official 64-bit Linux POV-Ray binary, and the native
> compiler for Linux isn't as efficient as the official POV-Ray binary's
> compiler (although I imagine that the performance gain from optimizing for
> 64-bit could make up for that).  Also, the Linux version is _command-line_
> so you'll need an external editor (e.g. Kate, QTPovEditor, etc.).  Out of
> curiousity, does the POV-Ray team's official Linux binaries use the same
> compiler series as the Windows ones, or is it just Windows binaries that
> use the Intel Compiler?
>
> I should also mention that POV-Ray's linux installer is command-line based
> (it's a historical thing; IIRC usually programs are installed from the
> command-line as a "super-user" and there's no graphical desktop - usually
> done for security reasons) - so you may like Window's graphical installer
> better.  My experience with graphical Linux installers has been rather
> unsettling, with few exceptions.
>
> If you can manage, I would recommend using 64-bit Windows and official
> POV-Ray Binaries.  If you still _want_ to try Linux, investigate the
> concept known as creating a "Dual-Boot" system (I believe most decent Linux
> distributions are designed for this from the get-go now) and then you can
> "have the best of both worlds".
>
> Just as a note, I write this from Linux on a dual-boot system with Windows
> XP. :)  32-bit though. *sigh*  I still keep XP for a couple of things -
> Linux doesn't do quite everything I need in a OS.
>
> -- Michael C.

Post a reply to this message