On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 16:43:11 -0600 Paul Hartman <paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Willie WY Wong > <wong...@member.ams.org> wrote: > > Actually, why is it that upstream does not provide 64bit binaries? > > (It always bothers me to see my wife's Windows 7 machines running a > > copy of firefox marked, in parenthesis, 32 bit.) > > They're working on it... They actually have started generating 64-bit > nightly builds for Windows and Linux: > https://nightly.mozilla.org/ > > If I had to guess what the hold-up has been: > > User confusion about which version to use (32-bit will work for > everyone, 64-bit won't) > Plugin availability (even Adobe and Sun didn't make 64-bit flash or > java until recently) It's mostly that their build people have had more important stuff to deal with for a while, such as adjusting their system to deal with the new-ish release cycle and giving their devs more a more flexible system for building testing binaries. (And there's been almost no clamor from the Windows world for 64-bit builds. For people who are clamoring, there's a third-party build called Waterfox.) But I thought they do release 64-bit binaries for Linux. There's a linux-x86_64 directory in their stable release directory, <ftp://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/latest/>.
