I don't personally use NDIS for my wireless (I bought Intel to make sure I didn't) but if this is still being used by anyone then 32-bit support is generally mandated for a lot of that.
Apart from that, I still have Solaris 10 for 32-bit, and an Ubuntu install server for anything more ancient (pre-pentium 3) Jon On 16 February 2015 at 12:15, Jim Klimov <jimkli...@cos.ru> wrote: > 16 февраля 2015 г. 11:06:06 CET, Alexander Pyhalov <a...@rsu.ru> пишет: > >Hello. > > > >We currently support (in some way) 32-bit systems. We avoid shipping > >64-binaries in default path or use isaexec for such things. > >But do we really need it? I haven't seen PC (not speaking about server) > > > >without 64-bit CPU for at least 8 years. > > > >Dropping support for 32-bit systems will allow us to port Oracle > >sources > >easier. Potentially, this solves time_t overflow. We could think about > >largefile support less. > > > >What are the cons of keeping support for 32-bit systems? I don't see > >much. If you see them, please, speak now. > > > >I'm inclined to make changes, breaking 32-bit systems only after next > >ISO snapshot. Of course, 32-bit libraries will be preserved. > > My main guess for 'pros' of retaining support would be small-footprint > systems including colocation of many smallish VMs even on modern hardware. > -- > Typos courtesy of K-9 Mail on my Samsung Android > > _______________________________________________ > openindiana-discuss mailing list > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > _______________________________________________ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss