So anyway, it was like, 12:11 CET Feb 11 2005, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
Peter was all like, "Dude,
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 11:19:36 +0100, Johan Lindquist wrote:
>> So anyway, it was like, 10:58 CET Feb 11 2005, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
>> Peter was all like, "Dude,

>>> If you MUST have a 64 bit proc, then I would suggest compiling
>>> everything as 32 for now. You COULD try the kernel at 64, but
>>> there have been reports of errors.
>>
>> I do not know of these reports of which you speak.
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=kernel+amd64+problems

<http://www.google.com/search?q=fatal+accident+crossing+the+street>

> For me, the safe way right now is to stay 32. JM2C.

Fair enough.

--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana. Perth ---> *
12:48:13 up 110 days, 1:14, 5 users, load average: 0.00, 0.04, 0.09
Linux 2.6.9 x86_64 GNU/Linux Registered Linux user #261729