22 января 2016 г. 18:03:14 CET, Alexander Pyhalov <a...@rsu.ru> пишет: >On 02/16/2015 13:06, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: >> 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. > >Today I've shipped PostgreSQL 9.5. AMD64 version still doesn't have >PL/Perl support, because we ship 32-bit Perl. The next Perl version >which we ship will be 64-bit only. I don't think there's much benefit >in >supporting 32bit systems. So, consider this an official statement. > >The next OI Hipster snapshot will no pretend to support 32bit CPUS.
Anecdotally, after a recent upgrade of BIOS on my laptop, for about a week it did not support 64-bit VM guests despite Virtualization support marked enabled in BIOS. I tried all sorts of things, until I found that for the past few years (and many releases) this well known vendor has a typo, and this choice is inverted. But by the end of knocking on walls with my head, I was morally prepared to continue using the existing Hipster guest installation as a 32-bit one, and happy that I could seamlessly do so. Jim -- 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