On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 5:32 AM, 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. So sat make it a secondary arch? Not sure how you can be promoting "specialised subset of the overall distribution" for x86-32 and saying that ARM must support 100% of what mainline currently does! I personally would be against demoting the x86 32 bit experience for the general user but in terms of specialist packages there's already a delta between x86-32 and 64 in mainline Fedora. Peter -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
