Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > IMHO, if even in the future only x86 will fit the speed criteria to be a > primary architecture for Fedora, then so be it. I do not see a need for any > other primary architecture(s). Why do we absolutely have to support an > architecture with inferior practical performance as a primary architecture? To put it as succinctly as possible: monocultures are bad. Focusing on just one arch is dangerous; you end up with non-portable code, and non-portable code is more often than not inferior on more measures than just the fact that it only works on one arch. But even if that's the only thing wrong with the code, you're still boxing yourself in if you don't strive to make it portable. Do you really think that x86 will be the most desirable architecture forever? Things change fast in this business, and that arch is weighted down by enough bad ancient decisions that I think it's eventually going to lose out. I thought it was a serious error to drop PPC from primary-arch status. But now that we've done that, putting in another one should be a high priority wish-list item. I'm as concerned as anyone about whether we can (in the near future) get ARM builders that are fast enough to make it *practical* for ARM to be a PA. But I think denying that we need non-Intel PAs is just fundamentally wrongheaded. regards, tom lane -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
