* Chris Murphy: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2023, at 11:55 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Demi Marie Obenour: >> >>> From this thread, it appears that non-LFS 32-bit software is fundamentally >>> unsupportable in the long run, just like software with 32-bit time_t is >>> unsupportable. That leaves two options: >>> >>> 1. Break the ABI, preferably in such a way that causes non-LFS >>> code to fail at load time rather than crashing. >>> >>> 2. Drop 32-bit support from the distribution altogether. >>> >>> It looks like trying to keep 32-bit non-LFS software working will be an >>> endless time sink and is not sustainable in the long term. >> >> My impression is different. It's btrfs that is a poor choice for people >> who want to run 32-bit software, have a lot of file creations/deletions, >> and do not want to reformat and reinstall periodically. The situation >> with XFS, for example, is different because you can supply the inode32 >> mount option and get 32-bit applications going again, maybe after making >> in-place copies of a few files. > > It should be straightforward to have mock create a subvolume for each > chroot instead of a directory. Subvolumes have their own inode pool. Yes, for mock, because of its temporary chroots. I'm more worried about those who encounter the issue with their home directories. Thanks, Florian _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
