On Jul 12, 2013, at 5:32, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:58:08PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:50:24PM -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >>>> Or does it mean x86 as PA is out of line? There are a lot more people >>>> with ARM devices than x86. Sorry everybody, we're going to have to demote >>>> x86. ;-) >>> False marketing. Majority of ARM devices out there don't run Fedora and >>> never will. >> >> Sooner or later, though, we probably _should_ deemphasize 32-bit x86. > > The website already links to 64-bit in preference to 32-bit. There's > arguably reasons to prefer 32-bit in certain memory-constrained > environments, but there's certainly arguments in favour of (say) > dropping most of the 32-bit x86 package set and turning it into a > specialised subset of the overall distribution. Heck, if you're doing that, go x32 for those small set of libraries and force folks to build against those :) We'll have a similar API on AArch64 in due course and I wouldn't want to see a Primary Architecture missing feature parity with secondaries... :P -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
