Arthur Zamarin <arthur...@gentoo.org> writes: > Hi all, this will be a long mail, and might be confusing, I'll try to > organize it, but this is a mess, so bear with me. > [...] > ======== 32-bit arches ======== > > This includes stable arches x86, arm, ppc, sparc32, dev arches s390, and > maybe more. Those are in much worse situation, with a mess on various > fronts, some of them super hard to continue support. For example > qtwebengine is less and less likely to manage to compile on a > real-hardware, and not 32-bit chroot on 64-bit host. Arch Team want to > minimize our work on those arches, meaning mass-destable and even > mass-dekeyword, with potentially full drop of stable status. > > ======== x86 ======== > > Stable 32-bit arch. I'll be honest, I don't believe at all this should > be stable arch anymore. I propose making it dev arch, and mass-dekeyword > stuff we got because of inertia. This arch is close to HW die. (let's > not talk about i486 vs i686).
I think the mfpmath=sse thing [0] makes this a bit better but I still sympathise with your point. [0] https://public-inbox.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/ce894afe6c2b324fef012da9bb9387cfde7aed03.ca...@gentoo.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
