On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 5:32 AM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59(a)srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:58:08PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:50:24PM -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > > Or does it mean x86 as PA is out of line? There are a lot more people
> > > with ARM devices than x86. Sorry everybody, we're going to have to
> > > x86. ;-)
> > False marketing. Majority of ARM devices out there don't run Fedora and
> > never will.
> Sooner or later, though, we probably _should_ deemphasize 32-bit x86.
The website already links to 64-bit in preference to 32-bit. There's
arguably reasons to prefer 32-bit in certain memory-constrained
environments, but there's certainly arguments in favour of (say)
dropping most of the 32-bit x86 package set and turning it into a
specialised subset of the overall distribution.
So sat make it a secondary arch? Not sure how you can be promoting
"specialised subset of the overall distribution" for x86-32 and saying
that ARM must support 100% of what mainline currently does! I
personally would be against demoting the x86 32 bit experience for the
general user but in terms of specialist packages there's already a
delta between x86-32 and 64 in mainline Fedora.