On Sunday, September 8, 2019 9:06:43 PM MST Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 11:44 PM John M. Harris Jr. <joh...@splentity.com> > wrote: > > > > > > On Sunday, September 8, 2019 7:05:39 PM MST Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 7:00 AM vvs vvs <vvs...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, but where did you saw that I said something about i686 > > > > *kernel*? I think that I explicitly mentioned *x86_64* kernel with > > > > i686 > > > > userland and described why it could be beneficial for some users with > > > > limited memory. > > > > > > > > > > > > And a child with no vaccines isn't that much of a danger to the > > > community. Until someone opens a window, or forgets to wash a glass, > > > and the *other* unvaccinated children form a wonderful way to spread > > > an infection. > > > > > I fail to see how a comparison of x86 to a disease is really relevant. If > > you really want to go that route, I'll tell you now that x86 is no more > > "unsecurable" than x64, both arches have security issues, and it's > > unavoidable. There are also vulnerabilities with specific > > implementations. > > You snipped the part about how few if any people, including primary > software authors, are supporting x86 architectures anymore, so they > will not be maintained or patched. Thus, they will not be protected > against attacks, even obsolete attacks. If there are more than a few > such machines, and they are not completely isolated, i.e. they are > permitted to play with the vaccinated children, they can form pools of > vulnerable hosts and defeat the "herd immunity" from the generally > better maintained and supported software. > > It's the pool of unmaintained and unmaintainable software I'm > expressing a concern about. If you'd care to take on the task of > supporting the architecture, of porting patches and testing them, > well, the world has many freedoms and this is one of them. I just > don't think you'll have many clients as the architecture has almost > universally been discarded. There are few tools, like FreeDOS and > wine, for running quite obsolete software, that may still benefit from > the availability of x86 libraries in Fedora. Maybe even Xen? But not > many.
While I don't have statistics on that, all of the anecdotal evidence supports that vendors are still "supporting" 32 bit software. In fact, nearly all proprietary software for RHEL, for example, is 32 bit. That's now how vulnerabilities work, and just being 64 bit doesn't solve any security issue. i686 has not been "discarded". I have no clue where this idea comes from. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
