On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Matthias Clasen <mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I've added a section about hw requirements to the spec. It is a bit > vague atm. Can we (and should we) make it more precise ? I actually like the wording there, even though it's vague. It's sufficient to describe the long term of the HW that's being targeted. In the short-term, I think that precludes existing ARM boards as a target fairly clearly. That isn't to say that someone can't produce an ARM version of Workstation, but the graphics situation and boot methods that exist today aren't really suitable for it to be considered a blocker. The more iffy part is i686 machines. I know some people still have 32-bit x86 machines they'd like to keep working, and RHEL 7 won't be an option for them either. CentOS 7 might be doing a 32-bit rebuild, but I honestly don't know if/when that would land. The question becomes how important to Workstation is this class of machine? I personally think that lands in the same status as ARM: possible for someone to create but not a blocker. josh -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
