On Wednesday 2015-05-06 20:35, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 02:06:20PM -0400, Robert Schweikert wrote:
Well, I am not convinced about this. Especially that SLE no longer has an x86 implementation.
I'm going to say something that will be very unpopular but I feel it really needs to be said. Should we really care so much about i586? I don't have any 32-bit system since something like 2008, I definitely haven't seen any 32-bit x86 CPU in usual e-shops for at least 5 years and I'm not sure I would be able to buy one today if I tried hard.
One does not even need to try hard. http://www.ebay.de/itm/IBM-eServer-xSeries-x-335-2-x-XEON-2-8GHz-CD-/140672266437?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_77&hash=item20c0b870c5 These kinds of servers are somewhat popular with the gaming community (at least the guys I am in contact with) to host game daemons at gatherings. As you can see, these are quite the vintage systems — previously used systems that other entities have decommissioned. However, they still pack enough punch per watt to be not written off by their current new owners.
Try to answer honestly: how much testing and QA did current (13.2 or Tumbleweed) openSUSE kernel get on i586?
I can tell by experience of administering aforementioned IBM models: sufficient.
How much chance of getting attention to an i586-specific bug would you get?
i586 is so well-establlished that I do not expect any more issues with the platform.
Do you really believe that given the circumstances and popularity of i586 among kernel developers, the state of i586 kernel would be significantly worse if we based openSUSE kernel on SLE (compared to current state)?
In case of i586, a SLE kernel might do. But since openSUSE produces a $modern kernel _anyway_, snatching of the i586 build result for said modern kernel is cheap. coolo's idea of placing i586 onto the ports backburner sounds acceptable. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org