12

I've recently seen the TeXLive "roadmap" here:

https://www.tug.org/texlive/

It seems TeXLive 2014 is just around the corner...

I've also noticed that past versions of TeXLive are all 32-bit. Are they planning to release a 64-bit version for TeXLive 2014?

If not, what are the reasons for still keeping it as 32-bit?

Additional Info

Perhaps I wasn't so clear since I'm seeing a lot of close votes going on: The question is Why does the TeXLive group doesn't release a 64-bit version of TeXLive for Windows? It seems to be a 64-bit version for Linux... and I can't seem to understand what drives the group to keep Windows on 32 bits. Are there any special reasons for this?

Mario S. E.
  • 18,609
  • 1
    About 64 bit versus 32 bit: http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/20036/what-are-the-advantages-of-tex-live-over-miktex/118522#comment101391_20200 – kiss my armpit May 26 '14 at 18:28
  • 3
    Does it make a difference if 32 or 64 bit? More memory? Less Tex exceeds error? ;-) I think, this is an off-topic question. –  May 26 '14 at 18:30
  • I'm not so sure about this... I'm no computer architect, but I have a feeling there must be a difference somewhere. Perhaps not in terms of real performance, but maybe there are some other advantages. Which ones, you ask? That's why I asked the question: there are by far more technical savvy guys here than myself :) – Mario S. E. May 26 '14 at 18:33
  • Does this question only apply to windows users? I have different binaries for 32 and 64 bit machines on Linux – d-cmst May 26 '14 at 19:07
  • @dcmst excellent point, I don't know if there is a 64-bit version for Linux. – Mario S. E. May 26 '14 at 19:11
  • @dcmst: Well, I just looked about pdftex. It is already a 64-bit binary on Linux. So what would be the difference? –  May 26 '14 at 19:14
  • @MoneyOrientedProgrammer: The link you provided treats only marginally with the topic of this OP, it is rather 'argument' about the (disadvantages) of MikTeX over TexLive ;-) –  May 26 '14 at 19:22
  • 1
    @ChristianHupfer I believe the same difference there is between a 32 and a 64 version of a specific software: the 64 bit version is optimized for using 64 bit CPU instructions, can use more RAM, can allocate more RAM to a single process, etc. This is a guess, I have no knowledge about the inner working of TeX Live binaries. – d-cmst May 26 '14 at 19:24
  • @dcmst: Yes, those features are known to me. I never looked into the programming of the tex binaries, but I doubt the code would really benefit from switching to 64bit integer or long long double floating point registers/variables (apart from tex stuff connected with true math). –  May 26 '14 at 19:27
  • I've used for some years the x86_64-darwin set of binaries, which look 64 bit to me. – egreg May 26 '14 at 19:58
  • For Linux/Unix 64 bit versions have been around for at least a decade, see e.g. ftp://tug.org/historic/systems/texlive/2004/dvd.en.html, maybe longer (e.g. for sparc). – Alex May 26 '14 at 20:30
  • 2
    I don't remember the details but if you search the archives of the TL mailing lists, you should find an explanation. I suspect that it is basically because maintaining the Windows version is a PITA and the idea of maintaining two of them is not something happily entertained by those who must do the maintaining. So since 32 bit works on 64 bit but 64 bit doesn't work on 32 bit, it has to be 32 bit. Maintaining multiple versions for GNU/Linux, on the other hand, is relatively straightforward. However, I could be misremembering so if you want to know, you'll have to read the TL discussion. – cfr May 26 '14 at 22:19
  • @cfr Thanks! that's the type of answer I was looking for! – Mario S. E. May 26 '14 at 22:38
  • @ChristianHupfer I think there is a limitation on how large the memory consumption of a TeX process can get. At least we get pdftex processes exceeding 1GB and I think these run only on 64bit systems. Also IIRC there is a limitation on how large included PDF files can get. – Stephan Lehmke May 28 '14 at 04:38
  • Of course it makes difference. With 32 bit you are limited to small documents. And the applications only uses more memory for the same executable if the code was compiled without optimization, using the new 64 bit registers to the old 32 ones. But you can divide data differently, joining two 32 bit chunks onto one 64 bit (approximately) and using 64 bit commands. – skan Jul 08 '15 at 12:39
  • It actually is becoming a huge problem for me, even lualatex runs out of memory frequently when I do things like display data cubes on beamer posters. These images must maintain their original structure, so no, I cannot downsample them... – daaxix Aug 03 '15 at 23:04

2 Answers2

10

We don't release 64bit Windows native binaries as the official TeX Live, but users can install them by downloading

CTAN/systems/win32/w32tex/TLW64/tl-win64.zip

CTAN/systems/win32/w32tex/TLW64/00README.TLW64

Please read 00README.TLW64 carefully.

Akira Kakuto
  • 2,652
  • This works nicely. There does not appear to be any difference to win32, e.g., output or speed. Would you expect any improvement from this package at all? Memory limits should not be an issue, right? – bers Sep 01 '17 at 11:23
  • 1
    @bers I'm using a weaker optimization in the case of 64bit. I'll try to use the same optimization as in the case of 32bit. – Akira Kakuto Aug 27 '19 at 21:05
8

The answer depends on the platform you use.

The documentation gives this list of platforms:

   a [ ] alpha-linux      DEC Alpha with GNU/Linux
   b [ ] amd64-freebsd    x86_64 with FreeBSD
   c [ ] amd64-kfreebsd   x86_64 with GNU/kFreeBSD
   d [ ] amd64-netbsd     x86_64 with NetBSD
   e [ ] armel-linux      ARM with GNU/Linux
   f [ ] armhf-linux      ARMhf with GNU/Linux
   g [ ] i386-cygwin      Intel x86 with Cygwin
   h [ ] i386-freebsd     Intel x86 with FreeBSD
   i [ ] i386-kfreebsd    Intel x86 with GNU/kFreeBSD
   j [ ] i386-linux       Intel x86 with GNU/Linux
   k [ ] i386-netbsd      Intel x86 with NetBSD
   l [ ] i386-solaris     Intel x86 with Solaris
   m [ ] mipsel-linux     mipsel with Linux
   o [ ] powerpc-linux    PowerPC with GNU/Linux
   p [ ] sparc-solaris    Sparc with Solaris
   s [ ] universal-darwin universal binaries for MacOSX/Darwin
   t [ ] win32            Windows
   u [ ] x86_64-cygwin    x86_64 with Cygwin
   v [ ] x86_64-darwin    x86_64 with MacOSX/Darwin
   w [ ] x86_64-linux     x86_64 with GNU/Linux
   x [ ] x86_64-solaris   x86_64 with Solaris

As you see, you have 64 bit binaries for x86 architecture on BSD, Cygwin, Darwin, Linux, Solaris, but only 32 bit for native Windows (not Cygwin), as well as other hardware architectures.

As to your second questions - AFAIK nobody volunteered to compile TL with Windows and 64-bit compiler. If you want, you may volunteer :)

Also, you may want to try Cygwin.

Boris
  • 38,129
  • Just a little side question: why this 64-bit version for windows is not available in the donwload page of TeXLive? – Mario S. E. May 28 '14 at 11:28
  • 1
    @MarioS.E. Because nobody compiled one. Again, as soon as anybody volunteers, it will be available for download, and, provided people are interested, then (starting with the next TL) on DVD – Boris May 28 '14 at 14:57