On Fri, 2021-04-23 at 09:07 -0500, Brandon Nielsen wrote:
Thanks for following up. I was mostly trying to gauge if this was common enough it should be a proposed blocker.
Now, not to be a stick in the mud, but what other common armhfp hardware is out there? If the Pi 3B+ isn't "up to the task", perhaps desktop images that aren't expected work should just be dropped? I'm not sure a desktop environment running on armhfp in a VM is that common of a use case.
We're now looking at publicly releasing a version of Fedora that apparently just doesn't work when all immediately obvious documentation implies it should.
I can't speak to "immediately obvious documentation", but it's worth remembering that Workstation on 32-bit ARM is not release blocking by policy. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/34/ReleaseBlocking the only release-blocking 32-bit ARM image left is minimal, and the release criteria preamble state: "The current set of release-blocking desktops for x86_64 is GNOME and KDE, and for aarch64 is GNOME. No desktop is release-blocking for 32- bit ARM." https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria#Basic_Release_Requirem...
If there is documentation or marketing that gives the impression that Workstation on 32-bit ARM is some sort of priority/"supported"/recommended/blocking/whatever environment, it should be changed.