On 11 Sep 2019, at 16:12, vvs vvs <vvs009@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Even better. That means that you can still get support for x86 but it will require some more work on the user's side. They should just check if that bug is indeed i686 specific. > > I believe that all that argument for the lats three days was completely unnecessary and should be blamed on an utterl failure of communication. The fundamental thing here is that, when a package fails on S390 but not on x86-64, there are motivated people in the S390 SIG who'll help me out with what's wrong, explaining the differences between S390 and x86-64 in a useful format, and often just fixing it if it's an S390-specific oddity, not a straight bug that happens not to manifest on x86-64. In contrast, the x86 SIG never got enough volunteers to do the same role - if a build was an issue on x86 but not x86-64, then they'd not have the available manpower to help the package maintainer (often the kernel maintainers, in x86's case) fix the build. Had the x86 SIG been able to identify the root causes of bugs in packages that failed on x86, like the kernel, and come up with usable workarounds and/or fixes, then Fedora would not be considering dropping x86. As it is, though, it appears that nobody cares enough about 32-bit kernels and binaries (although some x86-64 people care about 32-bit libraries) to keep i686 builds going. Fundamentally, this happens in volunteer projects - nobody wants to do the work, nobody is willing to pay enough to get someone else to want to do the work, so it doesn't happen. -- Simon _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
