On Tue, 2006-07-25 at 13:46 -0700, keith mannthey wrote: > On Tue, 2006-07-25 at 15:43 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 12:29:34PM -0700, keith mannthey wrote: > > > On Tue, 2006-07-25 at 14:34 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 11:24:42AM -0700, keith mannthey wrote: > > > > > > > > > Modern Summit hardware x460 is EMT64e (x440,x445 is not) but as you > > > > > know sometimes customers run 32bit OS's on 64bit boxes. > > > > > > > > I hear this from time to time, and every time I ask "why doesn't > > > > 32bit emulation in 64bit kernel work for you work?", the only > > > > answers that seen to come back are various flavours of > > > > "we didn't know about it" or "haven't tried it". > > > > > > Is there a "Guarantee" that 32bit apps will just work with 64bit > > > kernels? I don't think all 32bit apps test (or work) on 64bit OS and a > > > such don't fall in the "Supported" configuration. Customers like to have > > > ground to stand on when things break. If they run unsupported in their > > > software stack things can get messy (who will fix it?) if problems arise > > > or performance is bad compared to 32bit native. > > > > This is exactly the sort of hand-waving I was talking about. > > If something doesn't work, lets find out why and _FIX_ it. > > Scaremongering, and handwaving isn't going to solve a single bug. > > As noted ISV's move slow and customers even slower. Some customers > would still buy AS2.1 if they could. I have head customers say (this > year) that the can't move to 2.6 (RHEL 4) because it hasn't been out > long enough and saw the risk as too high. It is out of my scope for me > to say what all the reasons are for why customers don't just run 64-bit > all the time, but they don't. I think change takes time. > but how is that type of customer relevant for FC6 ? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
