On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 12:56:37PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 07/05/2016 10:57 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > >If you need to run an i686 virtual machine based on Rawhide, my > >experience is that it's more likely than not that it won't boot, and > >no one cares. > > Well, that's independent for the state as primary vs secondary architecture. > > If we remove i686 as a primary architecture, we will not have i686 > packages in the x86_64 repository. Is this what we want? IMHO that would be bad. > (For me, armhfp is more more of a pain point due to slow build times.) Agreed, but OTOH armv7 has active users. Are we still using the Calxeda machines to do the builds? I have migrated my armv7 workloads to virtual machines running on aarch64 hardware, and it certainly "feels" like it performs better. I'll try to post some numbers to back this up in a little while ... Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines. Boot with a live CD or over the network (PXE) and turn machines into KVM guests. http://libguestfs.org/virt-v2v -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
