Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 29.01.2015 14:52, Paul W. Frields wrote: On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 06:00:28PM +0100, poma wrote: On 28.01.2015 17:17, Matthew Miller wrote: On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 08:37:59AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Hatters, or from Red Hatters working in their spare time. (Of course, as RH often does, many of the high-output contributors end up applying for and getting RH jobs, skewing the picture.) Well, I am observing quite a few people from major enterprises (RH business partners?) who are working on secondary archtectures, but I've very rarely (I don't recall any such incident) tripped over community folks who are working on them. Sometimes Red Hat business partners, but that doesn't mean that it's at Red Hat's direction. Overall, this is one of the few areas where we have money and paid effort flowing into the project that *isn't* coming from Red Hat, and I don't think that's a bad thing. These are community folks too, at least if we're doing it right. Additionally, I'm not privy to Red Hat's architecture strategy, but as far as I know, 32 bit ARM — currently our only primary non-x86 arch! — is not of particular corporate interest. It's obvious to me the aarch64 is RH's business interest. But aarch64 and 32-bit arm are _completely_ different architectures. I also think it's a little unfair to frame this as a conflict, overall. It may be the case that Red Hat is less interested in paying people to work on 32-bit x86 (although I don't actually know that to be a fact). But this is just like any other contributor to the community — you can't make people do work they're not interested in. Right, but that's not my point: My points are: - I once more feel pushed/tossed around by RH's interest and RH-Fedora-people who obviously don't properly separate RH and Community. I can't argue with feelings, but I also am not really sure what separation you're looking for here and how it would affect this. - Support for i386 falls out as a by-product at almost Zero-costs of the existing process. I don't think that's true at all. It signficantly increases QA load, and we're struggling a lot with release engineering being able to cope with Fedora at its current scale. Cutting back here has an clear benefit (whether or not it's significant enough to outweigh the other wide isn't settled, of course). More significantly, the Fedora kernel team tells me that _they_ don't feel like they have the resources to really honestly support the 32-bit kernel — and the rest all falls out from that. You write as if you - Fedora/Red Hat lack people capable of maintaining the kernel as if it were something special - they are not kernel developers. What Josh works except to maintains the kernel? I can't parse this last sentence correctly. Are you asking what Josh does other than maintain the kernel? Or are you asking something else? Ecco una traduzione in inglese di aver compreso: Fedora kernel position [Jan. 27th, 2015|10:22 am] As you might have seen Paul blog about, Red Hat has an immediate opening for a Fedora kernel maintainer position on my team. This is actually a fairly rare thing, as we don't have a lot of churn in our department and most of the engineering positions we hire for are primarily RHEL roles. If you have kernel experience and love working on fast-paced and frequently updated kernels, then this might be a good role for you. The job writeup is accurate in terms of what we expect, but it is also kind of broad. That is primarily because the role is too. Yesterday davej wrote a bit about how working on a Fedora kernel is like getting a 10,000ft view of everything. It's actually a really good analogy, and Dave would know as he did it longer than anyone. We deal with a lot of varied issues, on an even more varied set of hardware. This isn't a traditional development job. Being curious and willing to learn is key to enjoying a distro kernel maintainer role. That being said, we're also looking at ways to make a bigger impact both upstream and in Fedora itself. Filling this position is a key part of that and I'm excited to see how it plays out. If you're interested in it, please don't hesitate to send me questions via email or on IRC. Also be sure to apply via the online job posting here: http://jobs.redhat.com/jobs/descriptions/fedora-kernel-engineer-westford-massachusetts-job-1-5076703 -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 06:00:28PM +0100, poma wrote: On 28.01.2015 17:17, Matthew Miller wrote: On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 08:37:59AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Hatters, or from Red Hatters working in their spare time. (Of course, as RH often does, many of the high-output contributors end up applying for and getting RH jobs, skewing the picture.) Well, I am observing quite a few people from major enterprises (RH business partners?) who are working on secondary archtectures, but I've very rarely (I don't recall any such incident) tripped over community folks who are working on them. Sometimes Red Hat business partners, but that doesn't mean that it's at Red Hat's direction. Overall, this is one of the few areas where we have money and paid effort flowing into the project that *isn't* coming from Red Hat, and I don't think that's a bad thing. These are community folks too, at least if we're doing it right. Additionally, I'm not privy to Red Hat's architecture strategy, but as far as I know, 32 bit ARM — currently our only primary non-x86 arch! — is not of particular corporate interest. It's obvious to me the aarch64 is RH's business interest. But aarch64 and 32-bit arm are _completely_ different architectures. I also think it's a little unfair to frame this as a conflict, overall. It may be the case that Red Hat is less interested in paying people to work on 32-bit x86 (although I don't actually know that to be a fact). But this is just like any other contributor to the community — you can't make people do work they're not interested in. Right, but that's not my point: My points are: - I once more feel pushed/tossed around by RH's interest and RH-Fedora-people who obviously don't properly separate RH and Community. I can't argue with feelings, but I also am not really sure what separation you're looking for here and how it would affect this. - Support for i386 falls out as a by-product at almost Zero-costs of the existing process. I don't think that's true at all. It signficantly increases QA load, and we're struggling a lot with release engineering being able to cope with Fedora at its current scale. Cutting back here has an clear benefit (whether or not it's significant enough to outweigh the other wide isn't settled, of course). More significantly, the Fedora kernel team tells me that _they_ don't feel like they have the resources to really honestly support the 32-bit kernel — and the rest all falls out from that. You write as if you - Fedora/Red Hat lack people capable of maintaining the kernel as if it were something special - they are not kernel developers. What Josh works except to maintains the kernel? I can't parse this last sentence correctly. Are you asking what Josh does other than maintain the kernel? Or are you asking something else? -- Paul W. Frieldshttp://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 08:37:59AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Hatters, or from Red Hatters working in their spare time. (Of course, as RH often does, many of the high-output contributors end up applying for and getting RH jobs, skewing the picture.) Well, I am observing quite a few people from major enterprises (RH business partners?) who are working on secondary archtectures, but I've very rarely (I don't recall any such incident) tripped over community folks who are working on them. Sometimes Red Hat business partners, but that doesn't mean that it's at Red Hat's direction. Overall, this is one of the few areas where we have money and paid effort flowing into the project that *isn't* coming from Red Hat, and I don't think that's a bad thing. These are community folks too, at least if we're doing it right. Additionally, I'm not privy to Red Hat's architecture strategy, but as far as I know, 32 bit ARM — currently our only primary non-x86 arch! — is not of particular corporate interest. It's obvious to me the aarch64 is RH's business interest. But aarch64 and 32-bit arm are _completely_ different architectures. I also think it's a little unfair to frame this as a conflict, overall. It may be the case that Red Hat is less interested in paying people to work on 32-bit x86 (although I don't actually know that to be a fact). But this is just like any other contributor to the community — you can't make people do work they're not interested in. Right, but that's not my point: My points are: - I once more feel pushed/tossed around by RH's interest and RH-Fedora-people who obviously don't properly separate RH and Community. I can't argue with feelings, but I also am not really sure what separation you're looking for here and how it would affect this. - Support for i386 falls out as a by-product at almost Zero-costs of the existing process. I don't think that's true at all. It signficantly increases QA load, and we're struggling a lot with release engineering being able to cope with Fedora at its current scale. Cutting back here has an clear benefit (whether or not it's significant enough to outweigh the other wide isn't settled, of course). More significantly, the Fedora kernel team tells me that _they_ don't feel like they have the resources to really honestly support the 32-bit kernel — and the rest all falls out from that. - Making the i386 a secondary arch will cause additional costs and effort. As does any change, sure. -- Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org Fedora Project Leader -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 28.01.2015 17:17, Matthew Miller wrote: On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 08:37:59AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Hatters, or from Red Hatters working in their spare time. (Of course, as RH often does, many of the high-output contributors end up applying for and getting RH jobs, skewing the picture.) Well, I am observing quite a few people from major enterprises (RH business partners?) who are working on secondary archtectures, but I've very rarely (I don't recall any such incident) tripped over community folks who are working on them. Sometimes Red Hat business partners, but that doesn't mean that it's at Red Hat's direction. Overall, this is one of the few areas where we have money and paid effort flowing into the project that *isn't* coming from Red Hat, and I don't think that's a bad thing. These are community folks too, at least if we're doing it right. Additionally, I'm not privy to Red Hat's architecture strategy, but as far as I know, 32 bit ARM — currently our only primary non-x86 arch! — is not of particular corporate interest. It's obvious to me the aarch64 is RH's business interest. But aarch64 and 32-bit arm are _completely_ different architectures. I also think it's a little unfair to frame this as a conflict, overall. It may be the case that Red Hat is less interested in paying people to work on 32-bit x86 (although I don't actually know that to be a fact). But this is just like any other contributor to the community — you can't make people do work they're not interested in. Right, but that's not my point: My points are: - I once more feel pushed/tossed around by RH's interest and RH-Fedora-people who obviously don't properly separate RH and Community. I can't argue with feelings, but I also am not really sure what separation you're looking for here and how it would affect this. - Support for i386 falls out as a by-product at almost Zero-costs of the existing process. I don't think that's true at all. It signficantly increases QA load, and we're struggling a lot with release engineering being able to cope with Fedora at its current scale. Cutting back here has an clear benefit (whether or not it's significant enough to outweigh the other wide isn't settled, of course). More significantly, the Fedora kernel team tells me that _they_ don't feel like they have the resources to really honestly support the 32-bit kernel — and the rest all falls out from that. You write as if you - Fedora/Red Hat lack people capable of maintaining the kernel as if it were something special - they are not kernel developers. What Josh works except to maintains the kernel? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/22/2015 04:52 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:52:30AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: But the secondary arches and the non-x86 arches have always been a problem. To Non-RH Fedora packagers they are causing lags, delays and are basically untestable - In short a waste of time. I don't think that's a fair representation of the project's interest in non-x86 architectures. I don't agree. A lot of the interest in and work on secondary archs comes from non-Red Hatters, or from Red Hatters working in their spare time. (Of course, as RH often does, many of the high-output contributors end up applying for and getting RH jobs, skewing the picture.) Well, I am observing quite a few people from major enterprises (RH business partners?) who are working on secondary archtectures, but I've very rarely (I don't recall any such incident) tripped over community folks who are working on them. Additionally, I'm not privy to Red Hat's architecture strategy, but as far as I know, 32 bit ARM — currently our only primary non-x86 arch! — is not of particular corporate interest. It's obvious to me the aarch64 is RH's business interest. I also think it's a little unfair to frame this as a conflict, overall. It may be the case that Red Hat is less interested in paying people to work on 32-bit x86 (although I don't actually know that to be a fact). But this is just like any other contributor to the community — you can't make people do work they're not interested in. Right, but that's not my point: My points are: - I once more feel pushed/tossed around by RH's interest and RH-Fedora-people who obviously don't properly separate RH and Community. - Support for i386 falls out as a by-product at almost Zero-costs of the existing process. - Making the i386 a secondary arch will cause additional costs and effort. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:52:30AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: But the secondary arches and the non-x86 arches have always been a problem. To Non-RH Fedora packagers they are causing lags, delays and are basically untestable - In short a waste of time. I don't think that's a fair representation of the project's interest in non-x86 architectures. A lot of the interest in and work on secondary archs comes from non-Red Hatters, or from Red Hatters working in their spare time. (Of course, as RH often does, many of the high-output contributors end up applying for and getting RH jobs, skewing the picture.) Additionally, I'm not privy to Red Hat's architecture strategy, but as far as I know, 32 bit ARM — currently our only primary non-x86 arch! — is not of particular corporate interest. I also think it's a little unfair to frame this as a conflict, overall. It may be the case that Red Hat is less interested in paying people to work on 32-bit x86 (although I don't actually know that to be a fact). But this is just like any other contributor to the community — you can't make people do work they're not interested in. -- Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org Fedora Project Leader -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:22:42AM -0500, Derrik Walker v2.0 wrote: As a LONG time Redhat/Fedora user, I use Pidora since it's practically the same as my Fedora/CentOS systems ( I'd rather spend time learning how to program the Rapi's GPIO ports then learning a new Linux distribution ). If they dropped support for that, I'd be more than a little annoyed. Keep in mind that Pidora is a remix _anyway_. -- Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org Fedora Project Leader -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
Hi, The proposal is being considered because there really isn't anyone testing stuff on i686 machines, No one tunning atom (32-bit only) netbooks? I guess most tests could use a 64-bit hardware but 32-bit kernel etc. Few issues would show up only on real 32-bits only hardware. But if a commited Fedora developer would like to have a 32-bits only hardware for testing I'd hapily donate an eeepc netbook I have that still works fine. []s, Fernando Lozano -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 21.01.2015 18:26, jd1008 wrote: On 01/21/2015 03:40 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 01/21/2015 10:46 AM, poma wrote: You know that popular saying, Open source does not necessarily mean the open mind. I am in vehement disagreement with this and repeatedly expressed it before: OpenSource needs open minds. BTW Ralf, are you prepared for incoming inevitable Fedora debacle, I am semi-prepared :-) I am occasionally trying other distros and have a i386 multi-boot configuration on my (i386) Netbook, consisting of Win8.1, Fedora, openSUSE and Ubuntu. On this netbook, sse2 would not be a problem. Should Fedora drop the i386, this netbook will likely be converted Win8.1-only and will be used as dedicated Win-machine to serve those few cases I can not avoid using Win. did you choose a decent distribution for relocation of machinery? Not wrt. to the PIII, Firstly, these abandon sse, abandon sse2, abandon i386 discussions have taken me by surprise (IMO, these are a coup d'etat). I'll definitely will try to keep this machine running. So far, I haven't investigated which distros still support non-sse2 architectures. If CentOS7 did, I would switch to that now. Unfortunately the initial promise of the CentOS project to provide one, also doesn't seem to be wanting to become true. That said, I'll likely try openSUSE first, then Ubuntu and if all else fail - I'll likely resort CentOS6. But, as no decision has been drawn yet, at least for now, I don't feel a pressing need to act. Ralf I honestly do not see any reason to make so much noise about it. Where are 16 bit OS'es today? Does anyone want to go back to them? Not me. So, I think it is inevitable that support for 32 bit OS'es will come to an end. First you have to agree with yourself, regardless of how many bits! :) -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 21.01.2015 16:58, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 10:22:21 +0100 poma pomidorabelis...@gmail.com wrote: The same goes for you as for Kevin Fenzi, are you the official representatives of the Red Hat, is this the official Red Hat statement? I'm not Rahul, but I'll note that he currently does not work for Red Hat, he was simply providing his take on things based on his experience. I do work for Red Hat, but my statements are my own. I am in no way a spokesperson for the company. If you want official communications from Red Hat the company: http://www.redhat.com/en/about/contact In any case, I'm not sure how we got off on this Red Hat tangent. The proposal from the blog post that started this has been retracted: http://smoogespace.blogspot.com/2015/01/mea-maxima-culpa.html He was attempting to make an absurd proposal, and many people seem to have taken him seriously. kevin Thanks for the explanation and reference. poma -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/21/2015 03:39 AM, Rex Dieter wrote: Ralf Corsepius wrote: and ignores the fact the i386 is a multilibbed/~arched archecture of the x86_64. Good point, the multilib part of the issue is interesting... and an important one too. Not really. The proposal, if it were made and accepted, neither of which have actually happened, would only affect the availability of an installer and kernel for i686. That's the only thing that would change. The x86_64 release would continue to have 32-bit application support. The proposal is being considered because there really isn't anyone testing stuff on i686 machines, and problems that affect those machines take a long time to fix because the maintainers don't have hardware on which to test, verify, diagnose, and fix those problems. Making it a secondary arch would communicate that the responsibility for finding and fixing problems that only affect i686 machines rests with the users who have that hardware, which is realistically where it already is. Making the 32 bit release a secondary arch would essentially be nothing more than being honest about the state of that release. Developers and maintainers are not using 10+ year old hardware. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 21.01.2015 20:10, Fernando Lozano wrote: Hi, The proposal is being considered because there really isn't anyone testing stuff on i686 machines, No one tunning atom (32-bit only) netbooks? Above is nothing but pure speculation - also false. I guess most tests could use a 64-bit hardware but 32-bit kernel etc. Few issues would show up only on real 32-bits only hardware. Here is actually the opposite case, x64 hw x32 kernel - the occurrence of bugs that do not exist on the original x32 hw. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/21/2015 06:26 PM, jd1008 wrote: I honestly do not see any reason to make so much noise about it. I think I am not shouting loud enough. But I understand free speech is not welcome here. Where are 16 bit OS'es today? Does anyone want to go back to them? Apples and Oranges Not me. So, I think it is inevitable that support for 32 bit OS'es will come to an end. We are talking about a supposed to be community driven Linux distro bringing a sofar supported OS to a sudden death without any actual cause. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 21.01.2015 19:24, Gordon Messmer wrote: The proposal is being considered because there really isn't anyone testing stuff on i686 machines, and problems that affect those machines Please do not speak in the name of other people! poma -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/21/2015 11:08 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 01/21/2015 06:26 PM, jd1008 wrote: I honestly do not see any reason to make so much noise about it. I think I am not shouting loud enough. But I understand free speech is not welcome here. False! There are only a few knuckleheads who flare up if you say things they do not like. But it is still their their right to speak. I was simply stating what is inevitable. I do not think 32 bit support will come to an end any time soon. As I had previously stated, there are many countries where most people still have the P3 computers. But even those are going to be junked sometime. Where are 16 bit OS'es today? Does anyone want to go back to them? Apples and Oranges Not at all!! 32 bit arch cpu's will end up being only for embedded controllers the way 8 bit and 16 bit cpu's are used in small controllers/appliances. Are you ready for 128 bit architectures? Among the areas that will benefit from 128 bit archs (from wikipedia): RISC-V architecture is defined for 32, 64 and 128 bits of integer data width. Universally Unique Identifiers (UUID) consist of a 128-bit value. IPv6 routes computer network traffic amongst a 128-bit range of addresses. ZFS is a 128-bit file system. GPU chips commonly move data across a 128-bit bus.[1] 128 bits is a common key size for symmetric ciphers and a common block size for block ciphers in cryptography. The AS/400 virtual instruction set defines all pointers as 128-bit. This gets translated to the hardware's real instruction set as required, allowing the underlying hardware to change without needing to recompile the software. Past hardware was 48-bit CISC, while current hardware is 64-bit PowerPC. Because pointers are defined to be 128-bit, future hardware may be 128-bit without software incompatibility. Increasing the word size can speed up multiple precision mathematical libraries. Applications include cryptography. Technology does not wait for a change in our sentiments :) :) Not me. So, I think it is inevitable that support for 32 bit OS'es will come to an end. We are talking about a supposed to be community driven Linux distro bringing a sofar supported OS to a sudden death without any actual cause. Well, the direction of the community is actually driven by the sponsors; in this case, RedHat. Perhaps Ubuntu will continue to support 32 bit because I think (and still hope) their direction is not dictated by any commercial sponsors/interests. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 10:22:21 +0100 poma pomidorabelis...@gmail.com wrote: The same goes for you as for Kevin Fenzi, are you the official representatives of the Red Hat, is this the official Red Hat statement? I'm not Rahul, but I'll note that he currently does not work for Red Hat, he was simply providing his take on things based on his experience. I do work for Red Hat, but my statements are my own. I am in no way a spokesperson for the company. If you want official communications from Red Hat the company: http://www.redhat.com/en/about/contact In any case, I'm not sure how we got off on this Red Hat tangent. The proposal from the blog post that started this has been retracted: http://smoogespace.blogspot.com/2015/01/mea-maxima-culpa.html He was attempting to make an absurd proposal, and many people seem to have taken him seriously. kevin pgpsr0yuVamk0.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/21/2015 03:40 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 01/21/2015 10:46 AM, poma wrote: You know that popular saying, Open source does not necessarily mean the open mind. I am in vehement disagreement with this and repeatedly expressed it before: OpenSource needs open minds. BTW Ralf, are you prepared for incoming inevitable Fedora debacle, I am semi-prepared :-) I am occasionally trying other distros and have a i386 multi-boot configuration on my (i386) Netbook, consisting of Win8.1, Fedora, openSUSE and Ubuntu. On this netbook, sse2 would not be a problem. Should Fedora drop the i386, this netbook will likely be converted Win8.1-only and will be used as dedicated Win-machine to serve those few cases I can not avoid using Win. did you choose a decent distribution for relocation of machinery? Not wrt. to the PIII, Firstly, these abandon sse, abandon sse2, abandon i386 discussions have taken me by surprise (IMO, these are a coup d'etat). I'll definitely will try to keep this machine running. So far, I haven't investigated which distros still support non-sse2 architectures. If CentOS7 did, I would switch to that now. Unfortunately the initial promise of the CentOS project to provide one, also doesn't seem to be wanting to become true. That said, I'll likely try openSUSE first, then Ubuntu and if all else fail - I'll likely resort CentOS6. But, as no decision has been drawn yet, at least for now, I don't feel a pressing need to act. Ralf I honestly do not see any reason to make so much noise about it. Where are 16 bit OS'es today? Does anyone want to go back to them? Not me. So, I think it is inevitable that support for 32 bit OS'es will come to an end. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 10:26 -0700, jd1008 wrote: I honestly do not see any reason to make so much noise about it. Where are 16 bit OS'es today? Does anyone want to go back to them? Not me. So, I think it is inevitable that support for 32 bit OS'es will come to an end. Of course it will end. But there are probably still a few 32bit only netbooks moldering in warehouses today that haven;t been spotted and remaindered out yet. The last 286 based PC was probably sold over twenty years ago. The i386 arch is gone, and few lamented it's passing by the time that happened, same for i486 and i586. But i686 is still a viable thing and a lot of perfectly good hardware uses it. Heck, the range of Thinkpads with both a 64bit CPU and a 'real' Thinkpad keyboard is pretty narrow so it pays to remain open to the option of a good 32bit machine. The problem with Smoogen's 'modest proposal' was that it was impossible to detect the Swiftian intent since it was so in line with Fedora/RH thinking as to be all too plausible. RHEL already ditched i686 after all and 'chasing the shiny' is almost the Fedora motto. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/21/2015 10:46 AM, poma wrote: You know that popular saying, Open source does not necessarily mean the open mind. I am in vehement disagreement with this and repeatedly expressed it before: OpenSource needs open minds. BTW Ralf, are you prepared for incoming inevitable Fedora debacle, I am semi-prepared :-) I am occasionally trying other distros and have a i386 multi-boot configuration on my (i386) Netbook, consisting of Win8.1, Fedora, openSUSE and Ubuntu. On this netbook, sse2 would not be a problem. Should Fedora drop the i386, this netbook will likely be converted Win8.1-only and will be used as dedicated Win-machine to serve those few cases I can not avoid using Win. did you choose a decent distribution for relocation of machinery? Not wrt. to the PIII, Firstly, these abandon sse, abandon sse2, abandon i386 discussions have taken me by surprise (IMO, these are a coup d'etat). I'll definitely will try to keep this machine running. So far, I haven't investigated which distros still support non-sse2 architectures. If CentOS7 did, I would switch to that now. Unfortunately the initial promise of the CentOS project to provide one, also doesn't seem to be wanting to become true. That said, I'll likely try openSUSE first, then Ubuntu and if all else fail - I'll likely resort CentOS6. But, as no decision has been drawn yet, at least for now, I don't feel a pressing need to act. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
Ralf Corsepius wrote: IMO, this is a nonsensical proposal. The ix86 family definitely is much wider used than any other secondary architecture Fedora has been supporting and ignores the fact the i386 is a multilibbed/~arched archecture of the x86_64. Good point, the multilib part of the issue is interesting... and an important one too. -- Rex -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 20.01.2015 18:19, Rex Dieter wrote: poma wrote: On 20.01.2015 03:12, Bill Oliver wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: Rather read this: Changes/Modernise GCC Flags https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Modernise_GCC_Flags This *is* practically 32-bit platform retirement. Can you explain why you think that? Is it the introduction of requiring sse2? -- Rex You already do not have any influence what will happen, so why do you ask? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 20.01.2015 18:51, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 01/20/2015 06:19 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: Is it the introduction of requiring sse2? Yes, this would definitely be death of Fedora on my PIII and would force me to escape to a non-redhat distribution. I would also consider this to be an unfriendly act against those users, who are keeping such old machines around, - to drive old-hardware (This is the reason I keep a PIII). - to test SW. IMO, using old HW are an efficient means to reveal issues new SW has, one often would not notice on new HW. - because they tried to escape WinXP's EOL. With WinXP having been discontinued, many of these machines have been migrated to Linux or have been given away for free and now are being recycled for testing/experimental purposes. - to prevent unnecessary expenses. Many of machines from this generation are not as sensitive to HW-malfunctions and pre-planned obsolescence as later generations of HW and still are usable for occasional use. Another other question would be Why sse2? and why now? Fedora never, ever has had sse2, so the gradually remaining community of ix86-users are not expecting to see it. - I feel requiring sse2 is a management mistake, because it drives away users for the price of questionable advantages. To put into a provocative question: Do you want to keep the group of potential users big as possible or do you want squeeze the last bit out and destabilize Fedora? Ralf You know that popular saying, Open source does not necessarily mean the open mind. BTW Ralf, are you prepared for incoming inevitable Fedora debacle, did you choose a decent distribution for relocation of machinery? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 21.01.2015 03:41, Rahul Sundaram wrote: Hi On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Dave Ihnat wrote: It may seriously be time for Redhat to consider splitting Fedora into two distros--one tracking RHEL and continuing the role as testbed for RHEL, and the other taking up the role as an enthusiast's distro, and continuing to support the alternatives such as Pidora. Internally, Red Hat has a separate branch for RHEL that is different from Fedora and has its own testing including development, alpha and beta that is enterprise focused. Fedora has never been designed for just that purpose. It is much more broader than that. Rahul The same goes for you as for Kevin Fenzi, are you the official representatives of the Red Hat, is this the official Red Hat statement? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
Tim: Likewise. And I'm not keen on having one of the several hundred watt monster room heating PCs, either. Gordon Messmer: I'm not sure what you mean. Modern PCs tend to use a lot less power than older ones did. Upgrading almost always means running quieter, cooler, and using less power. Every newer PC that I've played with has used more power than the previous. Faster CPU, more cores in the CPU, more power. Bigger graphics cards, more power. And it's almost unavoidable using bigger graphics cards, thanks to desktop GUIs getting so bloated. -- [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp Linux 3.9.10-100.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Sun Jul 14 01:31:27 UTC 2013 x86_64 All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is no point trying to privately email me, I will only read messages posted to the public lists. George Orwell's '1984' was supposed to be a warning against tyranny, not a set of instructions for supposedly democratic governments. ZNQR LBH YBBX -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 21.01.2015 11:40, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 01/21/2015 10:46 AM, poma wrote: You know that popular saying, Open source does not necessarily mean the open mind. I am in vehement disagreement with this and repeatedly expressed it before: OpenSource needs open minds. These two should not be contradictory. BTW Ralf, are you prepared for incoming inevitable Fedora debacle, I am semi-prepared :-) I am occasionally trying other distros and have a i386 multi-boot configuration on my (i386) Netbook, consisting of Win8.1, Fedora, openSUSE and Ubuntu. You are a genuine enthusiast! On this netbook, sse2 would not be a problem. Should Fedora drop the i386, this netbook will likely be converted Win8.1-only and will be used as dedicated Win-machine to serve those few cases I can not avoid using Win. did you choose a decent distribution for relocation of machinery? Not wrt. to the PIII, Firstly, these abandon sse, abandon sse2, abandon i386 discussions have taken me by surprise (IMO, these are a coup d'etat). I'll definitely will try to keep this machine running. So far, I haven't investigated which distros still support non-sse2 architectures. If CentOS7 did, I would switch to that now. Unfortunately the initial promise of the CentOS project to provide one, also doesn't seem to be wanting to become true. That said, I'll likely try openSUSE first, then Ubuntu and if all else fail - I'll likely resort CentOS6. But, as no decision has been drawn yet, at least for now, I don't feel a pressing need to act. Ralf http://thelinuxworks.blogspot.com/2014/05/32-bit-enterpise-linux-still-matters.html Johnny HughesMay 31, 2014 at 6:57 PM We intend to have a 32 bit port available for CentOS.. But it will be best effort and may lag the official effort as it will be a secondary effort. http://mirrors.kernel.org/centos/7/isos/ x86_64/ Yeah, there *is* lag. Ralf, what do you think, whether Fedora end differently. :) -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Mon, 2015-01-19 at 22:26 -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote: I still have refused to thrown away my old laptops and desktops which are fine otherwise and do their assigned tasks. Likewise. And I'm not keen on having one of the several hundred watt monster room heating PCs, either. -- tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp Linux 3.17.8-200.fc20.i686 #1 SMP Fri Jan 9 00:01:03 UTC 2015 i686 All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is no point trying to privately email me, I will only read messages posted to the public lists. George Orwell's '1984' was supposed to be a warning against tyranny, not a set of instructions for supposedly democratic governments. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 03:24 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 02:12:23 + (UTC) Bill Oliver ven...@billoblog.com wrote: It's not a big deal to me -- all of my boxes are fairly modern. However, I thought one of the big selling points of linux in general is that you could run it on just about anything, including old, obsolete boxes. It is. Sure, but sometimes it's hard to target both ends of the spectrum. I do not agree with your statement, but believe this to be largely a matter of _will_. It's obvious to me, the ix86 doesn't fit into the Red Hat's business plans and their server deployment scenarios, so I'd presume there is a strong desire at RH to get rid of the ix86, which collides with a community desire to keep their ix86 running Fedora. Also, it's a matter of fact Fedora has been doing a fairly good job at keeping the ix86 in decent shape over the last decade, despite the gradually declining numbers of users, keeping Fedora as one of last resorts on such HW. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 09:04:32 AM Ralf Corsepius wrote: I do not agree with your statement, but believe this to be largely a matter of _will_. You may have unlimited will but there will only be 24 hours in a day. -- Regards, Sudhir Khanger, sudhirkhanger.com, github.com/donniezazen, 5577 8CDB A059 085D 1D60 807F 8C00 45D9 F5EF C394. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 10:23 AM, Sudhir Khanger wrote: On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 09:04:32 AM Ralf Corsepius wrote: I do not agree with your statement, but believe this to be largely a matter of _will_. You may have unlimited will but there will only be 24 hours in a day. Correct. but supporting the ix86 has not even been close to a problem to Fedora over the last decade. But the secondary arches and the non-x86 arches have always been a problem. To Non-RH Fedora packagers they are causing lags, delays and are basically untestable - In short a waste of time. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Jan 20 20:12, Tim wrote: On Mon, 2015-01-19 at 22:26 -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote: I still have refused to thrown away my old laptops and desktops which are fine otherwise and do their assigned tasks. Likewise. And I'm not keen on having one of the several hundred watt monster room heating PCs, either. I'm using a 32 bit netbook with Fedora on travel. Same thing, basically. Corinna -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
Tue, 20 Jan 2015 11:16:39 +0100 Who has measured speed difference 64 vs 32 when reading example New York Times? Any notable difference? :D :D Jarmo -- I'm afraid, that there's no fear -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 10:56 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Jan 20 20:12, Tim wrote: On Mon, 2015-01-19 at 22:26 -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote: I still have refused to thrown away my old laptops and desktops which are fine otherwise and do their assigned tasks. Likewise. And I'm not keen on having one of the several hundred watt monster room heating PCs, either. I'm using a 32 bit netbook with Fedora on travel. Same thing, basically. Me too. I am using a 2008/9 netbook w/ Fedora on travel, for several reasons: - In the interest of sustainability/environment, I refuse to throw awas this netbook (only 5 or 6 years old) - If it gets lost/stolen on travel, it would not do me much harm (It's long been written off). - Fedora just works on it - Being forced to switching to a different distro would mean significant effort work to me. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 20.01.2015 03:12, Bill Oliver wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: Rather read this: Changes/Modernise GCC Flags https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Modernise_GCC_Flags This *is* practically 32-bit platform retirement. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 20.01.2015 03:24, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 02:12:23 + (UTC) Bill Oliver ven...@billoblog.com wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: See: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Fedora-23-64-bit-Proposal Note that this is all from a blog post. :) There's not been any formal proposal, or even discussion on the devel list. Phoronix seems to be picking up any scrap of news. I guess it's flattering that Fedora is worth the scrutiny. Is this your professional or personal conclusion? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
Once upon a time, Dave Ihnat dih...@dminet.com said: Frankly, simply dropping 32-bit support would be one of the more stu--er, ill-considered--moves Redhat could make. So, since nobody is proposing that, I guess it is good? This thread started with a Phoronix summary of a blog post, not any actual proposal. Reading the actual blog actually suggests a proposal to move 32-bit archs to secondary arch status, where somebody would need to form a team, set up builders, etc., but that's a known thing that some other archs already do. IIRC the idea has been tossed around before even. If there's enough interest to keep 32-bit archs running, then a team of people would need to step up to do the necessary work. In any case, no concrete proposal has been made yet, and when one is, there will be discussion. -- Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
poma wrote: On 20.01.2015 03:12, Bill Oliver wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: Rather read this: Changes/Modernise GCC Flags https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Modernise_GCC_Flags This *is* practically 32-bit platform retirement. Can you explain why you think that? Is it the introduction of requiring sse2? -- Rex -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 1/20/15 11:07, Ian Malone wrote: So far as I know raspberry pi is also 32bit ARM. While Pidora is a remix rather than official Fedora dropping that would be similarly getting rid of a chunk of users. There has been some discussion on the dev list about 32 bit support in relation to changes to PIE (position independent execution) and i686, which is turning up people who are still using it. As a LONG time Redhat/Fedora user, I use Pidora since it's practically the same as my Fedora/CentOS systems ( I'd rather spend time learning how to program the Rapi's GPIO ports then learning a new Linux distribution ). If they dropped support for that, I'd be more than a little annoyed. - Derrik -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 20.01.2015 16:42, poma wrote: On 20.01.2015 03:12, Bill Oliver wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: Rather read this: Changes/Modernise GCC Flags https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Modernise_GCC_Flags This *is* practically 32-bit platform retirement. As mentioned in this thread: F22 System Wide Change: Hard... https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-January/206706.html -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 20 January 2015 at 15:53, poma pomidorabelis...@gmail.com wrote: On 20.01.2015 03:24, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 02:12:23 + (UTC) Bill Oliver ven...@billoblog.com wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: See: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Fedora-23-64-bit-Proposal Note that this is all from a blog post. :) There's not been any formal proposal, or even discussion on the devel list. Phoronix seems to be picking up any scrap of news. I guess it's flattering that Fedora is worth the scrutiny. Is this your professional or personal conclusion? You might say it's Phoronix's. Leader: An ambitious proposal is seeking to make Fedora 23 -- the Linux distribution release due out around October -- 64-bit-only for both x86 and ARM architectures. Concluding: although no official proposal has yet to be submitted and likely wouldn't be approved by FESCo for Fedora 23. RHEL does not support 32bit at this point anyway, though Fedora does. And it's been pointed out that OLPC represents a very large installed base of x86 systems. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/14.1.0 So far as I know raspberry pi is also 32bit ARM. While Pidora is a remix rather than official Fedora dropping that would be similarly getting rid of a chunk of users. There has been some discussion on the dev list about 32 bit support in relation to changes to PIE (position independent execution) and i686, which is turning up people who are still using it. -- imalone http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:22:42AM -0500, Derrik Walker v2.0 wrote: If they dropped support for that [Pidora], I'd be more than a little annoyed. Frankly, simply dropping 32-bit support would be one of the more stu--er, ill-considered--moves Redhat could make. Yes, Fedora is the test-bed, as you will, for RHEL. And perhaps it makes sense for RHEL, itself, to move to 64-bit only platforms. (Or not; how many smaller organizations are going to keep existing 32-bit installations running until they *have* to replace their current servers?) But if they expect Fedora to remain viable, pushing it to 64-bit is a more than questionable move. There's an entire ecosystem built around Fedora and spinoffs. It may seriously be time for Redhat to consider splitting Fedora into two distros--one tracking RHEL and continuing the role as testbed for RHEL, and the other taking up the role as an enthusiast's distro, and continuing to support the alternatives such as Pidora. Posting in hopes RH monitors the list and considers serious comments, -- Dave Ihnat dih...@dminet.com -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 10:50 AM, poma wrote: On 20.01.2015 16:42, poma wrote: On 20.01.2015 03:12, Bill Oliver wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: Rather read this: Changes/Modernise GCC Flags https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Modernise_GCC_Flags This *is* practically 32-bit platform retirement. As mentioned in this thread: F22 System Wide Change: Hard... https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-January/206706.html Some of us use 32-bit programs that are simply not available as 64-bit. Like the Skype client. Does this mean Skype will no longer be available in this platform? Temlakos -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 06:19 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: Is it the introduction of requiring sse2? Yes, this would definitely be death of Fedora on my PIII and would force me to escape to a non-redhat distribution. I would also consider this to be an unfriendly act against those users, who are keeping such old machines around, - to drive old-hardware (This is the reason I keep a PIII). - to test SW. IMO, using old HW are an efficient means to reveal issues new SW has, one often would not notice on new HW. - because they tried to escape WinXP's EOL. With WinXP having been discontinued, many of these machines have been migrated to Linux or have been given away for free and now are being recycled for testing/experimental purposes. - to prevent unnecessary expenses. Many of machines from this generation are not as sensitive to HW-malfunctions and pre-planned obsolescence as later generations of HW and still are usable for occasional use. Another other question would be Why sse2? and why now? Fedora never, ever has had sse2, so the gradually remaining community of ix86-users are not expecting to see it. - I feel requiring sse2 is a management mistake, because it drives away users for the price of questionable advantages. To put into a provocative question: Do you want to keep the group of potential users big as possible or do you want squeeze the last bit out and destabilize Fedora? Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
Bill Oliver wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: See: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Fedora-23-64-bit-Proposal Thread summary is incorrect (or at least misleading). The proposal (so far) is for 32bit to be downgraded from primary to secondary architecture. That is very different than end of 32bit support -- Rex -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 06:48 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: Bill Oliver wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: See: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Fedora-23-64-bit-Proposal Thread summary is incorrect (or at least misleading). The proposal (so far) is for 32bit to be downgraded from primary to secondary architecture. IMO, this is a nonsensical proposal. The ix86 family definitely is much wider used than any other secondary architecture Fedora has been supporting and ignores the fact the i386 is a multilibbed/~arched archecture of the x86_64. That is very different than end of 32bit support It's almost equal to it. It means pushing ix86-Fedora users to use Windows and Ubuntu. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 01:42 AM, Tim wrote: Likewise. And I'm not keen on having one of the several hundred watt monster room heating PCs, either. I'm not sure what you mean. Modern PCs tend to use a lot less power than older ones did. Upgrading almost always means running quieter, cooler, and using less power. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/19/2015 10:50 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: To further back up Kevin a 32-bit environment must stay around, if not for Linux apps, but for Windows apps. The 64-bit platform supports 32-bit wine. And for that matter, the person proposing the change isn't proposing that no 32-bit platform be released, but that it become a secondary arch. That means that it'd be available as long as there are resources in the community to maintain it. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 01:19:56PM -0800, Gordon Messmer wrote: I'm not sure what you mean. Modern PCs tend to use a lot less power than older ones did. Upgrading almost always means running quieter, cooler, and using less power. Yes, and no. Towers/desktops in use with SMBs, maybe. The dense xU and blade machines commonly in use in datacenters and some SMBs may be more energy-efficient than in the past, but they can generate a *lot* more heat. Cheers, -- Dave Ihnat dih...@dminet.com -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 10:52 AM, Temlakos wrote: Does this mean Skype will no longer be available in this platform? No. There hasn't been a proposal to remove 32 bit support from the 64 bit release. The proposal, which is still hypothetical, would be to make the 32 bit platform (the release with a 32 bit kernel, and all i686 packages) to a secondary release from its current status as a primary. Like other secondary archs, it would still be available. The change would primarily reflect the reality that the 32 bit release is mostly still available because it works, and not because there are people actively working on it. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 04:38 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 01/20/2015 10:52 AM, Temlakos wrote: Does this mean Skype will no longer be available in this platform? No. There hasn't been a proposal to remove 32 bit support from the 64 bit release. The proposal, which is still hypothetical, would be to make the 32 bit platform (the release with a 32 bit kernel, and all i686 packages) to a secondary release from its current status as a primary. Like other secondary archs, it would still be available. The change would primarily reflect the reality that the 32 bit release is mostly still available because it works, and not because there are people actively working on it. OK, here's where I stand. I've been using the 64-bit release for four years now. That includes a 64-bit kernel. But I have one or two 32-bit applications, that need 32-bit libraries. I would like to know these would still be available--until such time as the worthies who developed the Skype client, develop a better 64-bit client than they currently have developed. Temlakos -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 01:43 PM, Temlakos wrote: But I have one or two 32-bit applications, that need 32-bit libraries. I would like to know these would still be available Yes. If the 32 bit platform became a secondary arch, those apps would still run on the 64 bit release, just like they do now. The proposed change would not change the current 64 bit release. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 01:53 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: On 01/20/2015 03:26 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: The 64-bit platform supports 32-bit wine. You cannot run Win32 PE binaries with 64-bit wine. Wine does not emulate ( ;) ) arches. I know that. 32-bit Wine is available on the 64-bit Fedora platform/release. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 07:15 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 01/20/2015 01:53 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: On 01/20/2015 03:26 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: The 64-bit platform supports 32-bit wine. You cannot run Win32 PE binaries with 64-bit wine. Wine does not emulate ( ;) ) arches. I know that. 32-bit Wine is available on the 64-bit Fedora platform/release. I don't think 32-bit architecture will be going away permanently until the hardware and device manufacturers cease to build them. Until that time I think it's feasible to continue to support 32-bit along with 64-bit. It just makes sense in a way, since not everyone is in possession of a 64-bit machine whether desktop or laptop. I myself only have 2 64-bit devices, but my main machine is STILL the Gateway Intel Pentium Duo-Core T6321 laptop!and it's survived going from F15 thru to F21 with no problems!... EGO II -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 10:38 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 01/20/2015 10:52 AM, Temlakos wrote: Does this mean Skype will no longer be available in this platform? No. There hasn't been a proposal to remove 32 bit support from the 64 bit release. The proposal, which is still hypothetical, would be to make the 32 bit platform (the release with a 32 bit kernel, and all i686 packages) to a secondary release from its current status as a primary. As I said before, this proposal is silly non-sense. It simply is not workable and non-feasable. Like other secondary archs, it would still be available. The change would primarily reflect the reality that the 32 bit release is mostly still available because it works, and not because there are people actively working on it. This perception is only partially correct. The i386 just works until now, because it's a primary arch, which means people are taking care about build-time issues and integrational issues (multiarch/multilib), as a by-product of the regular build-process. At the very moment you drop that, this advantage will get lost and integration of i386 will require additional effort and gradually rot. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/21/2015 01:14 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 01/20/2015 01:43 PM, Temlakos wrote: But I have one or two 32-bit applications, that need 32-bit libraries. I would like to know these would still be available Yes. If the 32 bit platform became a secondary arch, those apps would still run on the 64 bit release, just like they do now. Keeping multi-arching (The ability to run different architecture runable) functional would require multi-libbing (The ability to build packages on different architectures) in sync. The proposed change would not change the current 64 bit release. Making the 32bit a secondary arch would loose this sync. The result would be chaos. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 06:12 PM, EGO-II.1 wrote: On 01/20/2015 07:15 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 01/20/2015 01:53 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: On 01/20/2015 03:26 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: The 64-bit platform supports 32-bit wine. You cannot run Win32 PE binaries with 64-bit wine. Wine does not emulate ( ;) ) arches. I know that. 32-bit Wine is available on the 64-bit Fedora platform/release. I don't think 32-bit architecture will be going away permanently until the hardware and device manufacturers cease to build them. Until that time I think it's feasible to continue to support 32-bit along with 64-bit. It just makes sense in a way, since not everyone is in possession of a 64-bit machine whether desktop or laptop. I myself only have 2 64-bit devices, but my main machine is STILL the Gateway Intel Pentium Duo-Core T6321 laptop!and it's survived going from F15 thru to F21 with no problems!... EGO II Not to mention that in many other countries, laptops and desktops are by and large 32 bit!! -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/20/2015 03:26 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: The 64-bit platform supports 32-bit wine. You cannot run Win32 PE binaries with 64-bit wine. Wine does not emulate ( ;) ) arches. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
Hi On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Dave Ihnat wrote: It may seriously be time for Redhat to consider splitting Fedora into two distros--one tracking RHEL and continuing the role as testbed for RHEL, and the other taking up the role as an enthusiast's distro, and continuing to support the alternatives such as Pidora. Internally, Red Hat has a separate branch for RHEL that is different from Fedora and has its own testing including development, alpha and beta that is enterprise focused. Fedora has never been designed for just that purpose. It is much more broader than that. Rahul -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:24:31 -0700 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote: On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 02:12:23 + (UTC) Bill Oliver ven...@billoblog.com wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: See: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Fedora-23-64-bit-Proposal Note that this is all from a blog post. :) There's not been any formal proposal, or even discussion on the devel list. Phoronix seems to be picking up any scrap of news. I guess it's flattering that Fedora is worth the scrutiny. Glad to note that. I still have refused to thrown away my old laptops and desktops which are fine otherwise and do their assigned tasks. Ranjan Receive Notifications of Incoming Messages Easily monitor multiple email accounts access them with a click. Visit http://www.inbox.com/notifier and check it out! -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
Many industrial systems use 32-bit HW, so supporting that platform is reasonable. JH -- Původní zpráva -- Od: Ranjan Maitra maitra.mbox.igno...@inbox.com Komu: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org Datum: 20. 1. 2015 7:26:42 Předmět: Re: End of 32-bit support? On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:24:31 -0700 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote: On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 02:12:23 + (UTC) Bill Oliver ven...@billoblog.com wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: See: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Fedora-23-64-bit- Proposal Note that this is all from a blog post. :) There's not been any formal proposal, or even discussion on the devel list. Phoronix seems to be picking up any scrap of news. I guess it's flattering that Fedora is worth the scrutiny. Glad to note that. I still have refused to thrown away my old laptops and desktops which are fine otherwise and do their assigned tasks. Ranjan Receive Notifications of Incoming Messages Easily monitor multiple email accounts access them with a click. Visit http://www.inbox.com/notifier and check it out! -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org;-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 19/01/15 10:11 PM, Bill Oliver wrote: On Mon, 19 Jan 2015, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 02:12:23 + (UTC) Bill Oliver ven...@billoblog.com wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: See: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Fedora-23-64-bit-Proposal Note that this is all from a blog post. :) ... but, but, it's on the intertubes. It must be true. Thanks for the reply. billo http://i.imgur.com/GiJIQwP.gif -- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Mon, 19 Jan 2015, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 02:12:23 + (UTC) Bill Oliver ven...@billoblog.com wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: See: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Fedora-23-64-bit-Proposal Note that this is all from a blog post. :) ... but, but, it's on the intertubes. It must be true. Thanks for the reply. billo -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
End of 32-bit support?
I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: See: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Fedora-23-64-bit-Proposal It's not a big deal to me -- all of my boxes are fairly modern. However, I thought one of the big selling points of linux in general is that you could run it on just about anything, including old, obsolete boxes. I've never been involved in doing packaging, etc., and I started thinking... How hard is it to make a 32-bit distro if you are making a 64-bit one anyway? I guess in the back of my mind I sorta assumed it was scripted and automatic, so it just meant running some script twice rather than once. Is it a tremendous hassle to make a 32-bit distro if you are making a 64-bit one anyway? billo -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 02:12:23 + (UTC) Bill Oliver ven...@billoblog.com wrote: I recently read an interesting article recently that suggested that Fedora 23 might be 64-bit only: See: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=Fedora-23-64-bit-Proposal Note that this is all from a blog post. :) There's not been any formal proposal, or even discussion on the devel list. Phoronix seems to be picking up any scrap of news. I guess it's flattering that Fedora is worth the scrutiny. It's not a big deal to me -- all of my boxes are fairly modern. However, I thought one of the big selling points of linux in general is that you could run it on just about anything, including old, obsolete boxes. Sure, but sometimes it's hard to target both ends of the spectrum. I've never been involved in doing packaging, etc., and I started thinking... How hard is it to make a 32-bit distro if you are making a 64-bit one anyway? I guess in the back of my mind I sorta assumed it was scripted and automatic, so it just meant running some script twice rather than once. Is it a tremendous hassle to make a 32-bit distro if you are making a 64-bit one anyway? Well, as noted it's N as many builds to build, sync around, download and test. Sometimes there are bugs only on one arch. You have to try and seperate things like compiler flags, etc. kevin pgpdKbHHH9tZj.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 01/19/2015 08:24 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Note that this is all from a blog post.:) It is unfortunate that site writes sensational headlines on a random few words. There's not been any formal proposal, or even discussion on the devel list. Phoronix seems to be picking up any scrap of news. I guess it's flattering that Fedora is worth the scrutiny. To further back up Kevin a 32-bit environment must stay around, if not for Linux apps, but for Windows apps. In order to run a super-majority of Windows software with wine, we will need to keep 32-bit around and I will be at the front of any opposition to removing 32-bit from Fedora. However, I will not stop the installer or kernel for 32-bit from being dropped. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: End of 32-bit support?
On 1/19/2015 10:50 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: On 01/19/2015 08:24 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Note that this is all from a blog post.:) It is unfortunate that site writes sensational headlines on a random few words. There's not been any formal proposal, or even discussion on the devel list. Phoronix seems to be picking up any scrap of news. I guess it's flattering that Fedora is worth the scrutiny. To further back up Kevin a 32-bit environment must stay around, if not for Linux apps, but for Windows apps. In order to run a super-majority of Windows software with wine, we will need to keep 32-bit around and I will be at the front of any opposition to removing 32-bit from Fedora. However, I will not stop the installer or kernel for 32-bit from being dropped. I suspect there remain parts of the planet where 32-bit machines and modest communication channels are all that is available. Command line software implementing dial-up sessions still need support if they're all that's available for some area's connectivity. Emergency field day connectivity should not be forgotten in the glare of high-resolution entertainment and various mega-cash flows. Maintaining effective operation of minimal systems remains an important foundation for successful larger-scale systems. Ken -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
