On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 2:09 PM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/04/2018 06:55 PM, Jeff Backus wrote:
Thanks for the insight. Yes, I can see the advantages. However, have things really gotten so bad that it justifies ejecting part of the community?
The cost of i686 support is not insignificant. Most of that happens upstream (like features only getting accepted when there's an i386/i686 implementation). There's little we can do about that, but:
In fedora, we are also a point of contact for weird bugs which someone needs to triage. I really don't want to do that, but due to the lack of secondary architectures, I'm often forced to because i686 breakage brings development on architectures which I actually care about to a halt.
Makes sense. Are these bugs mostly related to instruction set, size of int, or something else? (more for my curiosity, don't spend time looking)
I can justify this work if it helps downstream (so that we can be confident that customers will be able to run their legacy software going forward). But with the current divergence in build flags, it is fairly questionable whether my work can deliver such a benefit, and that is frustrating.
Yes, I I'm sure it is! I can appreciate the desire to consolidate configurations.
jeff
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/KQHF2MSR2HYFXZ6JWWK6OMSL76DSVBNZ/
