[opensuse-factory] 42.1 and 32 bit
Dear all, does for the upcomming version 42.1 a 32 bit version will be available? Nor for milestone 1 I only can find a x64 version. If 32 bit will be availalbe later on which stage of the development it is to be expected? Beta? RC? Best Regards Andreas -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 27.08.2015 11:34, Andreas Hoffmann wrote:
Dear all,
does for the upcomming version 42.1 a 32 bit version will be available? Nor for milestone 1 I only can find a x64 version.
If 32 bit will be availalbe later on which stage of the development it is to be expected?
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Stephan Kulow wrote:
On 27.08.2015 11:34, Andreas Hoffmann wrote:
Dear all,
does for the upcomming version 42.1 a 32 bit version will be available? Nor for milestone 1 I only can find a x64 version.
If 32 bit will be availalbe later on which stage of the development it is to be expected?
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
That's a pity. /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (26.2°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-27 13:48, Per Jessen wrote:
Stephan Kulow wrote:
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
That's a pity.
Indeed. I have 32 bit servers. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXe/QgACgkQja8UbcUWM1x8cAD/c2gRgjivOVunueZyjKxdwfZM 1x6hnO4Sx6fpMI2PSLUBAJ91FGnrYFr9yzxJYlF3GSEC/DyXsq5M1hgwmJF52UAO =WD76 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
And for me its the usage in small VMs, as 32 bit versions do need less RAM. Greetings Andreas On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Carlos E. R. <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-27 13:48, Per Jessen wrote:
Stephan Kulow wrote:
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
That's a pity.
Indeed. I have 32 bit servers.
- -- Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iF4EAREIAAYFAlXe/QgACgkQja8UbcUWM1x8cAD/c2gRgjivOVunueZyjKxdwfZM 1x6hnO4Sx6fpMI2PSLUBAJ91FGnrYFr9yzxJYlF3GSEC/DyXsq5M1hgwmJF52UAO =WD76 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Andreas Hoffmann wrote:
And for me its the usage in small VMs, as 32 bit versions do need less RAM.
Absolutely. My reasons are - - 32bit VMs - 32bit-only hardware (currently firewalls, and Asterisk system and some mythtv boxes). - running many 32bit apps (on 64bit hardware). (I have not yet attempted to run e.g. postfix-32bit under 64bit openSUSE). -- Per Jessen, Zürich (27.5°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Same for me, I use 32 bits old laptops, because of price $ $ $ Dsant, from France On 08/27/2015 02:09 PM, Andreas Hoffmann wrote:
And for me its the usage in small VMs, as 32 bit versions do need less RAM.
Greetings Andreas
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Carlos E. R. <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-27 13:48, Per Jessen wrote:
Stephan Kulow wrote:
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
That's a pity. Indeed. I have 32 bit servers.
- -- Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iF4EAREIAAYFAlXe/QgACgkQja8UbcUWM1x8cAD/c2gRgjivOVunueZyjKxdwfZM 1x6hnO4Sx6fpMI2PSLUBAJ91FGnrYFr9yzxJYlF3GSEC/DyXsq5M1hgwmJF52UAO =WD76 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 27/08/15 22:05, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-27 13:48, Per Jessen wrote:
Stephan Kulow wrote:
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
That's a pity. Indeed. I have 32 bit servers.
I really do not know what you were expecting. Afterall, you are simply a user :-) . I learnt a new acronym today: DILLIGAF. The changes in KDE5 appear to be in this category - and it may be spreading..... BC -- Using openSUSE 13.2, KDE 4.14.9 & kernel 4.1.6-2 on a system with- AMD FX 8-core 3.6/4.2GHz processor 16GB PC14900/1866MHz Quad Channel RAM Gigabyte AMD3+ m/board; Gigabyte nVidia GTX660 GPU -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/27/2015 06:48 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:
On 27/08/15 22:05, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-27 13:48, Per Jessen wrote:
Stephan Kulow wrote:
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
That's a pity. Indeed. I have 32 bit servers.
I really do not know what you were expecting. Afterall, you are simply a user :-) .
I learnt a new acronym today: DILLIGAF. The changes in KDE5 appear to be in this category - and it may be spreading.....
BC
Clever :^| What does the acronym stand for? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/27/2015 04:27 PM, Carl Symons wrote:
On 08/27/2015 06:48 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:
On 27/08/15 22:05, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-27 13:48, Per Jessen wrote:
Stephan Kulow wrote:
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
That's a pity. Indeed. I have 32 bit servers.
I really do not know what you were expecting. Afterall, you are simply a user :-) .
I learnt a new acronym today: DILLIGAF. The changes in KDE5 appear to be in this category - and it may be spreading.....
BC
Clever :^| What does the acronym stand for?
"It's an acronym for: Does It Look Like I Give a F@#k!!!!" Dsant, from France -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
* Dsant <forum@votreservice.com> [08-27-15 10:30]:
On 08/27/2015 04:27 PM, Carl Symons wrote:
On 08/27/2015 06:48 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:
On 27/08/15 22:05, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-08-27 13:48, Per Jessen wrote:
Stephan Kulow wrote:
>Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
That's a pity. Indeed. I have 32 bit servers.
I really do not know what you were expecting. Afterall, you are simply a user :-) .
I learnt a new acronym today: DILLIGAF. The changes in KDE5 appear to be in this category - and it may be spreading.....
BC
Clever :^| What does the acronym stand for?
"It's an acronym for: Does It Look Like I Give a F@#k!!!!"
And is certainly uncalled for here. It is the type of post that *should* remain on the OPs computer and reflects *only* on his character. Shame. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/27/2015 06:48 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:
On 27/08/15 22:05, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-27 13:48, Per Jessen wrote:
Stephan Kulow wrote:
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
That's a pity. Indeed. I have 32 bit servers.
I really do not know what you were expecting. Afterall, you are simply a user :-) .
I learnt a new acronym today: DILLIGAF. The changes in KDE5 appear to be in this category - and it may be spreading.....
BC
I do some work with KDE and with openSUSE, and I don't share your view that KDE doesn't seem to care about people who are just users. I'm skeptical that anyone with KDE said that they don't care about whatever issue was raised with them. Your comment comes across to me as a gratuitous insult. It doesn't help openSUSE nor will it make any difference with KDE. I'm interested in what prompted your comment about KDE. Would you please send some pertinent background information to me in a personal message? I'm reasonably sure that I can do something within KDE with any substance with merit. Carl -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Op donderdag 27 augustus 2015 23:48:40 schreef Basil Chupin:
I learnt a new acronym today: DILLIGAF. The changes in KDE5 appear to be in this category - and it may be spreading.....
BC
In my not so humble opinion you're crossing the lines of decent behaviour and respect. If you want to have the debate this way, it would have been polite to invite the KDE devs. An apology would be apropriate. My 2 cents -- Gertjan Lettink, a.k.a. Knurpht Official openSUSE Member openSUSE Forums Team -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am 27.08.2015 um 13:48 schrieb Per Jessen:
Stephan Kulow wrote:
On 27.08.2015 11:34, Andreas Hoffmann wrote:
Dear all,
does for the upcomming version 42.1 a 32 bit version will be available? Nor for milestone 1 I only can find a x64 version.
If 32 bit will be availalbe later on which stage of the development it is to be expected?
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
That's a pity.
+1 [My devel laptop is now a 32-bit machine.] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Stephan Kulow [27.08.2015 12:27]:
On 27.08.2015 11:34, Andreas Hoffmann wrote:
Dear all,
does for the upcomming version 42.1 a 32 bit version will be available? Nor for milestone 1 I only can find a x64 version.
If 32 bit will be availalbe later on which stage of the development it is to be expected?
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
Greetings, Stephan
I see. Since SLE 12 is 64 bit only, it would be quite a lot of work to create a 32 bit branch for Leap. Werner --
Werner Flamme composed on 2015-08-28 06:48 (UTC+0200):
Stephan Kulow composed:
If 32 bit will be availalbe later on which stage of the development it is to be expected?
Beta? RC?
I don't plan to create one at all
I see. Since SLE 12 is 64 bit only, it would be quite a lot of work to create a 32 bit branch for Leap.
If I understand this, it means 32 bit users when 13.2 support and Evergreen support expire either switch to another distro, switch to the rolling release TW, or risk non-support? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
32bit x86 , last officially released desktop/laptop cpu was released in 2010 , all 32bit consumer CPU are behind moral and physical service life . + No one report or repairs bug on 32bit openSUSE . On 28 August 2015 at 08:04, Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> wrote:
Werner Flamme composed on 2015-08-28 06:48 (UTC+0200):
Stephan Kulow composed:
If 32 bit will be availalbe later on which stage of the development it is to be expected?
Beta? RC?
I don't plan to create one at all
I see. Since SLE 12 is 64 bit only, it would be quite a lot of work to create a 32 bit branch for Leap.
If I understand this, it means 32 bit users when 13.2 support and Evergreen support expire either switch to another distro, switch to the rolling release TW, or risk non-support? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Ondřej Súkup composed on 2015-08-28 08:25 (UTC+0200):
+ No one report or repairs bug on 32bit openSUSE .
That's false. I file openSUSE bugs, and when I do, they're nearly always either filed against PC, X86, or i686, rarely against x86_64, IOW, most often on 32 bit, which is where I do most testing, and what I run to type this. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Ondřej Súkup composed on 2015-08-28 08:25 (UTC+0200):
all 32bit consumer CPU are behind moral and physical service life .
Morals must be different in your country than in mine. There's no moral or physical reason here to junk a PC just because it's 5 years old. My newest of many functioning test PCs running openSUSE was manufactured ~6 years ago. The motherboard I'm typing this with is about 7-8 years old. When caps go bad, I replace the caps, not the motherboard. It's an eco-friendly way of life, maybe using more energy daily, but less energy in recycling processes, less consumption of scarce resources, and less energy and waste in landfill management. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday 28 of August 2015 02:42:56 Felix Miata wrote:
Ondřej Súkup composed on 2015-08-28 08:25 (UTC+0200):
all 32bit consumer CPU are behind moral and physical service life .
Morals must be different in your country than in mine. There's no moral or physical reason here to junk a PC just because it's 5 years old. My newest of many functioning test PCs running openSUSE was manufactured ~6 years ago. The motherboard I'm typing this with is about 7-8 years old.
And I'm just going to reuse a motherboard/CPU I bought around 2006. My wife's machine has CPU I bought in 2005. Guess what... both are 64-bit. Even most of 5-8 year old machines are actually 64-bit. You would have to either carefully pick or dig even deeper (10+ years) to get hardware which is really 32-bit. And that's the point: most of those still running i586 distributions do run them on 64-bit capable hardware - because they believe (a) they don't need x86_64 unless they have >4GB of memory (b) it consumes less memory (c) it consumes less disk space In reality, x86_64 has a lot of advantages even without 4GB of memory, the memory footprint difference is (except specially crafted examples) not worth the hassle and the disk usage argument doesn't even deserve a comment. Sure, there is still some ancient 32-bit hardware around. But should we dedicate our limited resources to supporting it for years to come? I'm not sure it's worth the effort. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, On Aug 28 09:07 Michal Kubecek wrote (excerpt):
... our limited resources ...
What exactly do you mean with "our"? I think: If you mean openSUSE contributors then those are free to spend their time on what they like to get done. In contrast if you mean SUSE employees it is out of scope when they spend SUSE working hours on issues that have no relevance for SUSE products. Of course SUSE employees are free to spend their leisure time on basically anything they like. Because SLE12 is only made for 64-bit, 32-bit specific issues have no relevance for SLE12 products and accordingly a 32-bit version of Leap as no relevance for SUSE. Regarding a 32-bit version of Leap made by openSUSE contributors see my other mail. This not any kind of official statement. It is only my personal point of view. Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday 28 of August 2015 10:14:11 Johannes Meixner wrote:
Hello,
On Aug 28 09:07 Michal Kubecek wrote (excerpt):
... our limited resources ...
What exactly do you mean with "our"?
I meant the project as a whole.
If you mean openSUSE contributors then those are free to spend their time on what they like to get done. ... Regarding a 32-bit version of Leap made by openSUSE contributors see my other mail.
I fully agree with that. If openSUSE contributors who consider i586 support important (or even mandatory) decide to provide i586 version of the distribution, I'm not going to hinder them in any way. All I want to say is that if Coolo or anyone else feels like there is no need for i586 builds and images, I agree with them. And that I don't believe openSUSE Leap would suffer from an absence of i586 version. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-28 10:44, Michal Kubecek wrote:
And that I don't believe openSUSE Leap would suffer from an absence of i586 version.
Oh, yes, we would suffer. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXgN60ACgkQja8UbcUWM1x/aQD/adZt5X2izAB4B7k4fm50Woqm 8IMIul/jUZeMf6B2RssA+QGKSEZUX+K4B1FrVjSuGz+hskZLaywc/epLHyymUd8l =CmUT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-08-28 10:44 (UTC+0200):
I don't believe openSUSE Leap would suffer from an absence of i586 version.
Goodwill and sacrifice for the benefit of fellow man do seem to have become concepts of historical importance. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Dne 29.08.2015 v 6:06 Felix Miata napsal(a):
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-08-28 10:44 (UTC+0200):
I don't believe openSUSE Leap would suffer from an absence of i586 version.
Goodwill and sacrifice for the benefit of fellow man do seem to have become concepts of historical importance.
It is very easy to sacrifice resources and time of others. M.
Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Friday 28 of August 2015 02:42:56 Felix Miata wrote:
Ondřej Súkup composed on 2015-08-28 08:25 (UTC+0200):
all 32bit consumer CPU are behind moral and physical service life .
Morals must be different in your country than in mine. There's no moral or physical reason here to junk a PC just because it's 5 years old. My newest of many functioning test PCs running openSUSE was manufactured ~6 years ago. The motherboard I'm typing this with is about 7-8 years old.
And I'm just going to reuse a motherboard/CPU I bought around 2006. My wife's machine has CPU I bought in 2005. Guess what... both are 64-bit. Even most of 5-8 year old machines are actually 64-bit. You would have to either carefully pick or dig even deeper (10+ years) to get hardware which is really 32-bit.
Yeah, that's true.
And that's the point: most of those still running i586 distributions do run them on 64-bit capable hardware - because they believe
(a) they don't need x86_64 unless they have >4GB of memory (b) it consumes less memory (c) it consumes less disk space
It's not about belief, I can easily prove (b) to you. I don't care about (a) and (c).
Sure, there is still some ancient 32-bit hardware around. But should we dedicate our limited resources to supporting it for years to come? I'm not sure it's worth the effort.
Can anyone actually tally up the amount of resources needed? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (23.2°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday 28 of August 2015 10:15:03 Per Jessen wrote:
Michal Kubecek wrote:
And that's the point: most of those still running i586 distributions do run them on 64-bit capable hardware - because they believe
(a) they don't need x86_64 unless they have >4GB of memory (b) it consumes less memory (c) it consumes less disk space
It's not about belief, I can easily prove (b) to you. I don't care about (a) and (c).
OK, I'm pretty sure does consume _less_ memory. However, I seriously doubt you can prove to me the difference is (except for artificially crafted examples) big enough to outweigh the drawbacks of i586. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:35:55 +0200 Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz> wrote:
On Friday 28 of August 2015 10:15:03 Per Jessen wrote:
Michal Kubecek wrote:
And that's the point: most of those still running i586 distributions do run them on 64-bit capable hardware - because they believe
(a) they don't need x86_64 unless they have >4GB of memory (b) it consumes less memory (c) it consumes less disk space
It's not about belief, I can easily prove (b) to you. I don't care about (a) and (c).
OK, I'm pretty sure does consume _less_ memory. However, I seriously doubt you can prove to me the difference is (except for artificially crafted examples) big enough to outweigh the drawbacks of i586.
Michal Kubeček
You can observe halved memory consumption on lightly loaded machines regardless of application. - -> halved costs for small VPS users. I wouldn't be surprise if most of this user base went to get their OS elsewhere. - -- Jan Matějka | QA Engineer for Maintenance SUSE LINUX s.r.o. | https://www.suse.com/ GPG: A33E F5BC A9F6 DAFD 2021 6FB6 3EBF D45B EEB6 CA8B -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJV4CXJAAoJEIN+7RD5ejahLbMIAKMqmLHynMa28zisCx10MxLk iTxu2s+Oey3K2oLIC6OaTETfKoRrFlEY3KSritbswDZQ0UD+ID6FPHP4Gb79vlcT liZ+m+ZC/Q4wfu9r8uG3mvV1UUpzJswzjkLUvk7eLuCuJHkpcugkvka4TWgbQ4Jm Dnj9uBOnn7QAeFBKGuSpAOl2yqkTQfqklx0SLhLkOAUNSszWZv58ntzK3YwTSsca yj5s/Co13zaz8ry97lKIk7cvpEl90o+HKlRKiNZGxwJdyJ0htKL3Uxm96QObzc4u /gAzIBFlA7ZJQbinEHhlfbq9gAixTJi6LnrT9eJ8LB8Q/2g5QnebP3OBHsi7Ok8= =WOrK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Friday 28 of August 2015 11:11:37 Jan Matejka wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:35:55 +0200 Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz> wrote:
OK, I'm pretty sure does consume _less_ memory. However, I seriously doubt you can prove to me the difference is (except for artificially crafted examples) big enough to outweigh the drawbacks of i586.
You can observe halved memory consumption on lightly loaded machines regardless of application.
No, I can't. Smaller, yes, but not halved, not by far. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 11:25:11 +0200 Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz> wrote:
On Friday 28 of August 2015 11:11:37 Jan Matejka wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:35:55 +0200 Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz> wrote:
OK, I'm pretty sure does consume _less_ memory. However, I seriously doubt you can prove to me the difference is (except for artificially crafted examples) big enough to outweigh the drawbacks of i586.
You can observe halved memory consumption on lightly loaded machines regardless of application.
No, I can't. Smaller, yes, but not halved, not by far.
Yes. Halved. This is empiric data. Though I have been informed by OSukup the consumption reduction is different between multilib and nomultilib, which I don't remember which one I used. - -- Jan Matějka | QA Engineer for Maintenance SUSE LINUX s.r.o. | https://www.suse.com/ GPG: A33E F5BC A9F6 DAFD 2021 6FB6 3EBF D45B EEB6 CA8B -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJV4C0OAAoJEIN+7RD5ejah3QoH/1QenJ/GqEk7CRxo6/yitBKp QYB+pB/F0oHEy2fpJ+M5pP8kTPN/xS2WUaM5LItVW9omH/GGauFONoal1THtikq3 iLKYtNbPqDl0gSm1buhKakmFmeLKMn9p9e84YXjb7m38LdBAig16ab6dAhpKeZ57 NNbLMru7cEbiQ45ZGbdvUkLAdqV9FY3eW+12iT+04KakYlrUX8WN1CTZWxGMy4vs u5oOXuL15RJpK+eWHK5K1OJu3yzV4S6nLW0Q5VknGJMOSasrrZ3hWsSznRUOIMRK n1MWsz/Xpw8n5jt7QK6kn41tkWnn/bRWXT12+xX9jzFO1Bvyq30rejy2kAhXYz0= =nMtm -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Friday 28 of August 2015 11:42:38 Jan Matejka wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 11:25:11 +0200 Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz> wrote:
On Friday 28 of August 2015 11:11:37 Jan Matejka wrote:
You can observe halved memory consumption on lightly loaded machines regardless of application.
No, I can't. Smaller, yes, but not halved, not by far.
Yes. Halved. This is empiric data.
So are mine. When I last checked, the overall ratio was rather something like 1.25. I must admit this was ~5 years ago, I'm not even considering running an i586 system since I got rid of the last one (around 2008, IIRC). Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-28 11:25, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Friday 28 of August 2015 11:11:37 Jan Matejka wrote:
You can observe halved memory consumption on lightly loaded machines regardless of application.
No, I can't. Smaller, yes, but not halved, not by far.
I have observed applications that use roughly double memory on their 64 bit versions. I forget which, because my current desktops are 64 bit anyway. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXgOJ8ACgkQja8UbcUWM1w8yAD+IGLcJDlJLzMhqYw8R3fIXOBr RnYwPhK4DZq049RdzwQA/0OiXaa5/EJW7pm9gw4lIvbpU1zEuplA6Al7ZmKUOsv9 =3nvs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Friday 28 of August 2015 10:15:03 Per Jessen wrote:
Michal Kubecek wrote:
And that's the point: most of those still running i586 distributions do run them on 64-bit capable hardware - because they believe
(a) they don't need x86_64 unless they have >4GB of memory (b) it consumes less memory (c) it consumes less disk space
It's not about belief, I can easily prove (b) to you. I don't care about (a) and (c).
OK, I'm pretty sure does consume _less_ memory. However, I seriously doubt you can prove to me the difference is (except for artificially crafted examples) big enough to outweigh the drawbacks of i586.
Nothing artificial about it - in production, I can run many more postfix instances on 32bit than on 64bit. I have been doing this for more than ten years. In this environment, I haven't noticed any drawbacks of i586, but please do enlighten me. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (25.1°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On August 28, 2015 5:53:33 AM EDT, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Michal Kubecek wrote:
Michal Kubecek wrote:
And that's the point: most of those still running i586 distributions do run them on 64-bit capable hardware - because
On Friday 28 of August 2015 10:15:03 Per Jessen wrote: they
believe
(a) they don't need x86_64 unless they have >4GB of memory (b) it consumes less memory (c) it consumes less disk space
It's not about belief, I can easily prove (b) to you. I don't care about (a) and (c).
OK, I'm pretty sure does consume _less_ memory. However, I seriously doubt you can prove to me the difference is (except for artificially crafted examples) big enough to outweigh the drawbacks of i586.
Nothing artificial about it - in production, I can run many more postfix instances on 32bit than on 64bit. I have been doing this for more than ten years. In this environment, I haven't noticed any drawbacks of i586, but please do enlighten me.
Per, I'm very curious if a 64-bit kernel with primarily a 32-bit userspace would get you similar ram usage.
From what I can tell, all the 32-bit ugliness, etc is confined to the kernel.
It seems reasonable for opensuse to create a hybrid 64-bit kernel / 32-bit userspace release.
From my perspective that seems like it would have very similar ram usage characteristics, but eliminate having the kernel having artificial memory constraints.
Greg -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
greg.freemyer@gmail.com wrote:
On August 28, 2015 5:53:33 AM EDT, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Michal Kubecek wrote:
Michal Kubecek wrote:
And that's the point: most of those still running i586 distributions do run them on 64-bit capable hardware - because
On Friday 28 of August 2015 10:15:03 Per Jessen wrote: they
believe
(a) they don't need x86_64 unless they have >4GB of memory (b) it consumes less memory (c) it consumes less disk space It's not about belief, I can easily prove (b) to you. I don't care about (a) and (c). OK, I'm pretty sure does consume _less_ memory. However, I seriously doubt you can prove to me the difference is (except for artificially crafted examples) big enough to outweigh the drawbacks of i586.
Nothing artificial about it - in production, I can run many more postfix instances on 32bit than on 64bit. I have been doing this for more than ten years. In this environment, I haven't noticed any drawbacks of i586, but please do enlighten me.
Per,
I'm very curious if a 64-bit kernel with primarily a 32-bit userspace would get you similar ram usage.
It seems reasonable for opensuse to create a hybrid 64-bit kernel / 32-bit userspace release.
From my perspective that seems like it would have very similar ram usage characteristics, but eliminate having the kernel having artificial memory constraints.
Hi Greg, I completely agree - it was suggested to me some time ago, and I have been wanting to try it out for a while. I think I did once have a look at building e.g. a 32bit postfix or apache on a 64bit system, I can't remember why I didn't pursue it. /Per -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 6:53 AM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Nothing artificial about it - in production, I can run many more postfix instances on 32bit than on 64bit. I have been doing this for more than ten years. In this environment, I haven't noticed any drawbacks of i586, but please do enlighten me.
So.. what's so special about postfix in this case ? there is an scalability problem.. that someone may be able to look at. This is not a reason to keep the i586 builds around, it is a reason to investigate why you can't do that in the 64bit version. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 6:53 AM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Nothing artificial about it - in production, I can run many more postfix instances on 32bit than on 64bit. I have been doing this for more than ten years. In this environment, I haven't noticed any drawbacks of i586, but please do enlighten me.
So.. what's so special about postfix in this case ? there is an scalability problem.. that someone may be able to look at. This is not a reason to keep the i586 builds around, it is a reason to investigate why you can't do that in the 64bit version.
The 64bit version uses up more memory, that's all. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.5°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 6:53 AM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Nothing artificial about it - in production, I can run many more postfix instances on 32bit than on 64bit. I have been doing this for more than ten years. In this environment, I haven't noticed any drawbacks of i586, but please do enlighten me.
So.. what's so special about postfix in this case ? there is an scalability problem.. that someone may be able to look at. This is not a reason to keep the i586 builds around, it is a reason to investigate why you can't do that in the 64bit version.
The 64bit version uses up more memory, that's all.
While indeed the size of pointer is bigger and that may/will have an impact in memory consumption.. Your problem looks very suspicious to me.. when it was the last time you tried to do this ? in which openSUSE version, postfix version and kernel version ? ohh and what is the amount of postfix instances that the 32 bit machine can run vs the 64 bit one ? did you tried memory compression ? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 6:53 AM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Nothing artificial about it - in production, I can run many more postfix instances on 32bit than on 64bit. I have been doing this for more than ten years. In this environment, I haven't noticed any drawbacks of i586, but please do enlighten me.
So.. what's so special about postfix in this case ? there is an scalability problem.. that someone may be able to look at. This is not a reason to keep the i586 builds around, it is a reason to investigate why you can't do that in the 64bit version.
The 64bit version uses up more memory, that's all.
While indeed the size of pointer is bigger and that may/will have an impact in memory consumption.. Your problem looks very suspicious to me.. when it was the last time you tried to do this ?
(apologies for the delay in responding, it's been a very busy week). Last time - dunno, probably 3-4 years. I distinctly remember wanting to move up to 64bit away from PAE.
in which openSUSE version,
No idea. Maybe 11/12-something.
postfix version
Currently 2.11.x - back then whatever was the newest. Built from source.
and kernel version ?
Dunno.
ohh and what is the amount of postfix instances that the 32 bit machine can run vs the 64 bit one ? did you tried memory compression ?
I don't remember the numbers, something like 2000 on the 32bit machine vs 1200-1500 on the 64bit. Probably 4Gb or 8gb memory at the time. I'm really not sure, I didn't take any notes. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (16.8°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Last time - dunno, probably 3-4 years. I distinctly remember wanting to move up to 64bit away from PAE.
Ok..in 3 to 4 years both userspace and particularly the kernel change a huge deal and attempting to asses your problem with that frame of reference is going to be a futile endeavour, because we are effectively talking about something that no longer exists. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Last time - dunno, probably 3-4 years. I distinctly remember wanting to move up to 64bit away from PAE.
Ok..in 3 to 4 years both userspace and particularly the kernel change a huge deal and attempting to asses your problem with that frame of reference is going to be a futile endeavour, because we are effectively talking about something that no longer exists.
I haven't asked anyone to assess the problem. As to whether it exists, it's anybody's guess. I feel quite certain I can still run more postfix processes on a 32bit systems than on a 64bit with the same amount of memory. I haven't heard any real argument to the contrary. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (13.8°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Ondřej Súkup wrote:
32bit x86 , last officially released desktop/laptop cpu was released in 2010 , all 32bit consumer CPU are behind moral and physical service life .
My 2 mythtv backend boxes are still running on Intel P4s. Very much alive and no moral nor physical reason to replace them. Ditto for our corporate firewalls and asterisk server. Sure, 32bit-only hardware will eventually die off, but I'd still like to run 32bit VMs and 32bit openSUSE on 64bit hardware.
+ No one report or repairs bug on 32bit openSUSE .
I report them when I come across them. I think my most recent one was about 32bit xen install files missing in 13.2. https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=915963 -- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.4°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
My 2 mythtv backend boxes are still running on Intel P4s. Very much alive and no moral nor physical reason to replace them. Ditto for our corporate firewalls and asterisk server.
try to calculate energy needs of intel P4 vs modern 64bit cpu with sufficent power for this backends .. On 28 August 2015 at 09:53, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Ondřej Súkup wrote:
32bit x86 , last officially released desktop/laptop cpu was released in 2010 , all 32bit consumer CPU are behind moral and physical service life .
My 2 mythtv backend boxes are still running on Intel P4s. Very much alive and no moral nor physical reason to replace them. Ditto for our corporate firewalls and asterisk server.
Sure, 32bit-only hardware will eventually die off, but I'd still like to run 32bit VMs and 32bit openSUSE on 64bit hardware.
+ No one report or repairs bug on 32bit openSUSE .
I report them when I come across them.
I think my most recent one was about 32bit xen install files missing in 13.2.
https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=915963
-- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.4°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
A few things I'd like to clear up 1) This is a decision by Coolo and other contributors involved in releasing openSUSE, not 'SUSE' 2) Therefore, if other contributors feel there is a need to continue making a 32-bit version of Leap, then they can do it 3) That said, Michal and others are making very good practical points why a 32-bit version makes little sense. So far, most of the arguments for keeping a 32-bit version seem to believe running 32-bit in some scenarios has greater benefits than they do in reality. 4) The number of users of 32-bit openSUSE has been declining since as far back as our records can show. Even the 13.2 release which saw an almighty increase in total downloads, all of this growth was in 64-bit users, while 32-bit downloads continued their decline. 5) There is also the impact on our infrastructure to consider. We only have a single pool of Intel hardware on the Build Service and in openQA, responsible for building and testing both 32-bit and 64-bit intel. Not having 32-bit effectively doubles our available hardware for building and testing the distribution, and that's one hell of a good thing. Every time it's crossed your mind lately 'oh, it's taking a while for X to build' or 'why is it taking them so long to release a patch for Y' can probably be blamed on the infrastructure impact of providing a 32-bit version of a distribution for an every declining number of users. Therefore if people do step up to continue making a 32-bit distribution, I'd like to either see them find a way of mitigating the hardware impact of their work, or help us find sponsors willing to provide more hardware for the Build Service and openQA - and I think it's going to be quite hard to convince other organisations to sponsor hardware to support the building and testing of an architecture that's in such a state of decline. 6) My personal opinion is that it's a good decision to not waste any more time, effort, and hardware on a 32-bit distribution. 7) I hope/expect a discussion to start about ending 32-bit support in Tumbleweed to start someday soon - we have to accept nothing lasts forever, especially in Technology. On 28 August 2015 at 10:38, Ondřej Súkup <mimi.vx@gmail.com> wrote:
My 2 mythtv backend boxes are still running on Intel P4s. Very much alive and no moral nor physical reason to replace them. Ditto for our corporate firewalls and asterisk server.
try to calculate energy needs of intel P4 vs modern 64bit cpu with sufficent power for this backends ..
On 28 August 2015 at 09:53, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
Ondřej Súkup wrote:
32bit x86 , last officially released desktop/laptop cpu was released in 2010 , all 32bit consumer CPU are behind moral and physical service life .
My 2 mythtv backend boxes are still running on Intel P4s. Very much alive and no moral nor physical reason to replace them. Ditto for our corporate firewalls and asterisk server.
Sure, 32bit-only hardware will eventually die off, but I'd still like to run 32bit VMs and 32bit openSUSE on 64bit hardware.
+ No one report or repairs bug on 32bit openSUSE .
I report them when I come across them.
I think my most recent one was about 32bit xen install files missing in 13.2.
https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=915963
-- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.4°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown wrote:
A few things I'd like to clear up
1) This is a decision by Coolo and other contributors involved in releasing openSUSE, not 'SUSE' 2) Therefore, if other contributors feel there is a need to continue making a 32-bit version of Leap, then they can do it 3) That said, Michal and others are making very good practical points why a 32-bit version makes little sense. So far, most of the arguments for keeping a 32-bit version seem to believe running 32-bit in some scenarios has greater benefits than they do in reality.
Anyone not using 32bit openSUSE in reality probably has little idea of the benefits.
number of users. Therefore if people do step up to continue making a 32-bit distribution, I'd like to either see them find a way of mitigating the hardware impact of their work, or help us find sponsors willing to provide more hardware for the Build Service and openQA -
My company has offered hardware including rack-space before, but apparently the only way is to contribute cycles is to load the stuff on a truck and haul it to Nürnberg. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (24.9°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:49:31 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
A few things I'd like to clear up
1) This is a decision by Coolo and other contributors involved in releasing openSUSE, not 'SUSE' 2) Therefore, if other contributors feel there is a need to continue making a 32-bit version of Leap, then they can do it 3) That said, Michal and others are making very good practical points why a 32-bit version makes little sense. So far, most of the arguments for keeping a 32-bit version seem to believe running 32-bit in some scenarios has greater benefits than they do in reality. 4) The number of users of 32-bit openSUSE has been declining since as far back as our records can show. Even the 13.2 release which saw an almighty increase in total downloads, all of this growth was in 64-bit users, while 32-bit downloads continued their decline. 5) There is also the impact on our infrastructure to consider. We only have a single pool of Intel hardware on the Build Service and in openQA, responsible for building and testing both 32-bit and 64-bit intel. Not having 32-bit effectively doubles our available hardware for building and testing the distribution, and that's one hell of a good thing. Every time it's crossed your mind lately 'oh, it's taking a while for X to build' or 'why is it taking them so long to release a patch for Y' can probably be blamed on the infrastructure impact of providing a 32-bit version of a distribution for an every declining number of users. Therefore if people do step up to continue making a 32-bit distribution, I'd like to either see them find a way of mitigating the hardware impact of their work, or help us find sponsors willing to provide more hardware for the Build Service and openQA - and I think it's going to be quite hard to convince other organisations to sponsor hardware to support the building and testing of an architecture that's in such a state of decline.
IMO, we should soften the statement: e.g. i586 image may be provided, but only if anyone steps up as the image maintainer, and it'll be provided as a "Port", i.e. without any openQA and other tests performed for the official image. It's important to show the attitude that we're willing to help, not only just throwing away. Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-28 12:59, Takashi Iwai wrote:
IMO, we should soften the statement: e.g. i586 image may be provided, but only if anyone steps up as the image maintainer, and it'll be provided as a "Port", i.e. without any openQA and other tests performed for the official image.
It's important to show the attitude that we're willing to help, not only just throwing away.
Thanks. That would be some improvement :-) - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXgSnoACgkQja8UbcUWM1z7lwD/deRE/W9onqcjmYTZHlYZq2tL PiIaWRDEYWFxnZG4WqoA+wY9ksuHbaUpBz83MS+17YA0dltkN0Mxf0pGCfJklOka =WhDE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Takashi Iwai wrote:
IMO, we should soften the statement: e.g. i586 image may be provided, but only if anyone steps up as the image maintainer, and it'll be provided as a "Port", i.e. without any openQA and other tests performed for the official image.
As long we maintain the repos, I can live without the ISO image, but otherwise I'd be happy to help maintain 32-bit openSUSE.
It's important to show the attitude that we're willing to help, not only just throwing away.
Agree. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (30.4°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 2015-08-28 at 10:49 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
2) Therefore, if other contributors feel there is a need to continue making a 32-bit version of Leap, then they can do it
Like the Raspberry Pi images. Its a fair point; and reasonable for the target of openSUSE - at developers and sysadmins, who will, most likely, be on the current hardware. Better for the official distro to target its target (and use its resources appropriately) So long as those same devs can use out tools (OBS, OpenQA, SUSE Studio) to build 32-bit (or any architecture) respins... I don't see an issue. -- James Mason Technical Architect, Public Cloud openSUSE Member SUSE jmason@suse.com ------------------------------------- SUSECon 2015: Register at susecon.com
James Mason wrote:
On Fri, 2015-08-28 at 10:49 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
2) Therefore, if other contributors feel there is a need to continue making a 32-bit version of Leap, then they can do it
Like the Raspberry Pi images.
To my knowledge, we have separate ARM (and PowerPC) build-farms? Does anyone build openSUSE for s/390 or is it only SLES ?
Its a fair point; and reasonable for the target of openSUSE - at developers and sysadmins, who will, most likely, be on the current hardware. Better for the official distro to target its target (and use its resources appropriately)
So long as those same devs can use out tools (OBS, OpenQA, SUSE Studio) to build 32-bit (or any architecture) respins... I don't see an issue.
I agree - but will that be possible with Leap/42.1 ? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (24.0°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Per Jessen <per@computer.org> writes:
James Mason wrote:
On Fri, 2015-08-28 at 10:49 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
2) Therefore, if other contributors feel there is a need to continue making a 32-bit version of Leap, then they can do it
Like the Raspberry Pi images.
To my knowledge, we have separate ARM (and PowerPC) build-farms?
Not for armv6 which is built with qemu on x86-64 workers. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely different." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-28 08:25, Ondřej Súkup wrote:
32bit x86 , last officially released desktop/laptop cpu was released in 2010 , all 32bit consumer CPU are behind moral and physical service life .
I don't agree with this.
+ No one report or repairs bug on 32bit openSUSE .
Certainly not true. 13.1 was released with a nasty bug that affected 32 bit only (crash after hibernation, because of wrong instruction used), which was solved. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXgNtUACgkQja8UbcUWM1yyiQD9HSzz6P+d6K2ncJQsv/1149go 8LLKOLAyoQFoqAQgG0EA/3cNM8HrF0q2foMU5lU9xkIXJigATlW9IjheJKgFKH/u =I9Qq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday 28 of August 2015 02:04:31 Felix Miata wrote:
If I understand this, it means 32 bit users when 13.2 support and Evergreen support expire either switch to another distro
...or switch to the native architecture, finally.
switch to the rolling release TW...
I guess the only thing that really surprises me is that dropping i586 hasn't been done in Tumbleweed first.
or risk non-support?
As I wrote already some time ago, I'm not very confident about the level of i586 openSUSE support we have been providing for the last few years. Sure, we may run it through openQA (actually, I'm not even sure about that) but how many beta testers run it on their machines (compared to x86_64)? How likely are you going to get help with an i586-specific bug? I, for one, would have to install such system first as I haven't been running one for years. And I wouldn't be too happy about it as 32-bit address space is severely limiting which requires a lot of ugly hacks, hindering the debugging severely. I'm afraid discontinuing i586 would be something I would call acknowledging the state of things and stopping pretending rather than some big and groundbreaking step. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-08-28 08:48 (UTC+0200):
I'm afraid discontinuing i586 would be something I would call acknowledging the state of things and stopping pretending rather than some big and groundbreaking step.
Last I checked every distrowatch listing above openSUSE still provided a 32 bit version, and IIRC, it was necessary to drop below the top 10 to find one that didn't. Fedora still calls its 386. I remember seeing plenty of threads around where this sort of topic has come up, and seeing lots of people still using 32 bit by preference on their 64 bit systems. It seems to me any acknowledgement would primarily be that the majority of developers don't want to bother with less than the newest and fastest machines, largely I'll bet to compensate for software bloat, driving the cycle that makes vendors happy, but not so much users, particularly those on tight budgets. It won't surprise me if whichever top 10 distro first dumps 32 bit falls at least 2 spots in short order, unless several do it in short order. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday 28 of August 2015 03:16:41 Felix Miata wrote:
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-08-28 08:48 (UTC+0200):
I'm afraid discontinuing i586 would be something I would call acknowledging the state of things and stopping pretending rather than some big and groundbreaking step.
Last I checked every distrowatch listing above openSUSE still provided a 32 bit version, and IIRC, it was necessary to drop below the top 10 to find one that didn't. Fedora still calls its 386.
(Question of distrowatch listing order relevance aside.) Well, this doesn't actually contradict what I said. I have little reason to believe their level of actual support is much different from ours.
I remember seeing plenty of threads around where this sort of topic has come up, and seeing lots of people still using 32 bit by preference on their 64 bit systems.
That's exactly what I suspected: most people using 32-bit distributions these days actually do so because of their beliefs, not because they have to. Such use is certainly legitimate - but way less relevant for the question whether we should support the architecture.
It seems to me any acknowledgement would primarily be that the majority of developers don't want to bother with less than the newest and fastest machines,
Newest and fastest? 64-bit CPU's are widely available since ~2003 and prevailing since ~2005, for last 5 years, it's almost impossible to buy a 32-bit one. And again, it's not about "fastest". The tricks kernel has to do to cope with 32-bit architecture are quite ugly. There are even problems that can't be resolved on i586 (I remember a guy having over 60% of his 2GB RAM unused but unable to add a netfilter rule because of memory allocation failure). You have fewer registers, leading to much less efficient function calling convention etc.
largely I'll bet to compensate for software bloat, driving the cycle that makes vendors happy, but not so much users, particularly those on tight budgets.
Seriously?
It won't surprise me if whichever top 10 distro first dumps 32 bit falls at least 2 spots in short order, unless several do it in short order.
Pure speculation (or even wishful thinking). I could say once someone dares to do it, several others will follow - and it would be about as much fact based as your claim (i.e. not at all). Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-28 10:30, Michal Kubecek wrote:
And again, it's not about "fastest". The tricks kernel has to do to cope with 32-bit architecture are quite ugly. There are even problems that can't be resolved on i586 (I remember a guy having over 60% of his 2GB RAM unused but unable to add a netfilter rule because of memory allocation failure). You have fewer registers, leading to much less efficient function calling convention etc.
Most or all of the 32 bit hardware have less than 4 GB RAM, so you could drop the hacks needed to support more RAM. It would not impact me, I assume. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXgPJoACgkQja8UbcUWM1wgcwD+NmCkVHj7CGVEnDrKzHMrOWi0 LTNul89+ST2uV5OvojwA/j5FrZcyWmxsG9KyS4KkMYRF++9qnDVf7kfVNTS+rEdn =xzT0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday 28 of August 2015 12:48:58 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-08-28 10:30, Michal Kubecek wrote:
And again, it's not about "fastest". The tricks kernel has to do to cope with 32-bit architecture are quite ugly. There are even problems that can't be resolved on i586 (I remember a guy having over 60% of his 2GB RAM unused but unable to add a netfilter rule because of memory allocation failure). You have fewer registers, leading to much less efficient function calling convention etc.
Most or all of the 32 bit hardware have less than 4 GB RAM, so you could drop the hacks needed to support more RAM. It would not impact me, I assume.
I wasn't talking about PAE, that would be yet another layer of ugliness. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-28 12:55, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Friday 28 of August 2015 12:48:58 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-08-28 10:30, Michal Kubecek wrote:
And again, it's not about "fastest". The tricks kernel has to do to cope with 32-bit architecture are quite ugly. There are even problems that can't be resolved on i586 (I remember a guy having over 60% of his 2GB RAM unused but unable to add a netfilter rule because of memory allocation failure). You have fewer registers, leading to much less efficient function calling convention etc.
Most or all of the 32 bit hardware have less than 4 GB RAM, so you could drop the hacks needed to support more RAM. It would not impact me, I assume.
I wasn't talking about PAE, that would be yet another layer of ugliness.
Doesn't the compiler takes care automatically of having less registers? :-o I don't suppose a package maintainer has to do anything there if needed: it would be an upstream task. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXgSxgACgkQja8UbcUWM1wBxwD/dGxPjxmKV0aa+9mVpUfs5HCL ljl3Nz+mTR3K3lOkz8wBAKFUKiw4N6gy2H/VTXHZixyMlDzDZdBZbbfUerJ5v4AB =XK9u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 13:50:48 +0200 "Carlos E. R." <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-28 12:55, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Friday 28 of August 2015 12:48:58 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-08-28 10:30, Michal Kubecek wrote:
And again, it's not about "fastest". The tricks kernel has to do to cope with 32-bit architecture are quite ugly. There are even problems that can't be resolved on i586 (I remember a guy having over 60% of his 2GB RAM unused but unable to add a netfilter rule because of memory allocation failure). You have fewer registers, leading to much less efficient function calling convention etc.
Most or all of the 32 bit hardware have less than 4 GB RAM, so you could drop the hacks needed to support more RAM. It would not impact me, I assume.
I wasn't talking about PAE, that would be yet another layer of ugliness.
Doesn't the compiler takes care automatically of having less registers? :-o
Yes. But you still need to test the kernel and compilers. Then still some corner cases may fall through which affect only some applications triggering the compiler/kernel bug. Then some applications may inline assembly in the code, which would be another thing to look for.
I don't suppose a package maintainer has to do anything there if needed: it would be an upstream task.
In theory yes, in practice the package maintainers have to flip their own burgers sometimes. - -- Jan Matějka | QA Engineer for Maintenance SUSE LINUX s.r.o. | https://www.suse.com/ GPG: A33E F5BC A9F6 DAFD 2021 6FB6 3EBF D45B EEB6 CA8B -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJV4FitAAoJEIN+7RD5ejah2bMH/13nFhIataKk0w7dqGZUtwxO AJeeqhAbZS9vciGrqg4LO/vddoHrby27CYAMOzm4HGttFu2EoDM8YxckS4GBv0se 2/c4O3bM3cLYYMa2tJQuIIgZXig8M/tMe+N4pnH/csBQmamBjs+aMDaatmrdXR60 F81IWEbUIrL/PTuHLTqQcs9IuVucqt5Mw1j3I8sad3dWt0uhDWIqp5koKKVB6RCr 9XY1VTWD4f+vHIPFU/3hNi25tbhGoGUh+zVA7apwNld/5x6/LMg6HdixS76oiLT4 pznky7JpCpXL1D2hV7PuiMvic0s8oo9in7wgZ5wBlkkzw2xtODXeF7uQ6poIjHY= =jCE0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- N�����r��y隊Z)z{.���r�+�맲��r��z�^�ˬz��N�(�֜��^� ޭ隊Z)z{.���r�+��0�����Ǩ�
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-28 14:48, Jan Matejka wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 13:50:48 +0200 "Carlos E. R." <> wrote:
...
In theory yes, in practice the package maintainers have to flip their own burgers sometimes.
Ok, I see. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXgkKQACgkQja8UbcUWM1yeygD/RG1i0ClwQ5rJPZPZjqUWFqMP DpEemYuN0PoICBfFFTAA/jpKbb2uATfc5Bd+FP5M9TGRBfHcM99uyy6Oc1BsdobV =gG1t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/28/2015 10:30 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
That's exactly what I suspected: most people using 32-bit distributions these days actually do so because of their beliefs, not because they have to.
No, because I buy old 32 bits hardware... Dsant, from France -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday 28 of August 2015 13:01:12 Dsant wrote:
On 08/28/2015 10:30 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
That's exactly what I suspected: most people using 32-bit distributions these days actually do so because of their beliefs, not because they have to.
No, because I buy old 32 bits hardware...
I wrote "most", not "all" so that one counterexample does not suffice... Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 28 August 2015 at 13:01, Dsant <forum@votreservice.com> wrote:
No, because I buy old 32 bits hardware...
Dsant, from France
I'm confused where the expectation comes from that new modern operating systems should run on old obsolete hardware 32 bit hardware is no longer produced - this is the very definition of obsolete. Now we have clear indications that the use base of 32-bit Linux is reaching minimal levels, I really do not see the justification for the extra work that supporting the 32-bit intel architecture requires -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/28/2015 09:35 AM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 28 August 2015 at 13:01, Dsant <forum@votreservice.com> wrote:
No, because I buy old 32 bits hardware...
Dsant, from France
I'm confused where the expectation comes from that new modern operating systems should run on old obsolete hardware
32 bit hardware is no longer produced - this is the very definition of obsolete.
Generally things have a useful lifespan past the end of the last unit being produced. Otherwise manufacturers would have a hard time convincing people to buy stuff once something is targeted to go out of production. Thus I'd say this is a weak argument at best.
Now we have clear indications that the use base of 32-bit Linux is reaching minimal levels, I really do not see the justification for the extra work that supporting the 32-bit intel architecture requires
Fair enough. Later, Robert -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU Public Cloud Architect LINUX rjschwei@suse.com IRC: robjo
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 15:35:10 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
On 28 August 2015 at 13:01, Dsant <forum@votreservice.com> wrote:
No, because I buy old 32 bits hardware...
Dsant, from France
I'm confused where the expectation comes from that new modern operating systems should run on old obsolete hardware
Well, it's been a virtue of Linux in general that it keeps supporting the old hardware the other OSes discontinued. Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-28 16:20, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 15:35:10 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
On 28 August 2015 at 13:01, Dsant <f> wrote:
No, because I buy old 32 bits hardware...
I'm confused where the expectation comes from that new modern operating systems should run on old obsolete hardware
Well, it's been a virtue of Linux in general that it keeps supporting the old hardware the other OSes discontinued.
Absolutely. We have been telling people for many years to switch to Linux because of this very reason. To be able to continue using our old computers, and not be forced to buy again. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXgkWAACgkQja8UbcUWM1wdqwD/dAhnvoMEBrpG5ioifTRuvNps qzHEQYPUyLPgB6ArvFAA/30C0Li//s9akdBqB7K3UkN16Atpv4VczGMyXEJozEJs =hggC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/28/2015 03:35 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
Now we have clear indications that the use base of 32-bit Linux is reaching minimal levels, I really do not see the justification for the extra work that supporting the 32-bit intel architecture requires Ok, I believe you, you convinced me because you might have figures.
I'm confused where the expectation comes from that new modern operating systems should run on old obsolete hardware
32 bit hardware is no longer produced - this is the very definition of obsolete. Explanation : the second hand laptops market, only about 20€ per machine. Anyway it will happens one day, so 32 bits is not worth.
Dsant, from France -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown wrote:
On 28 August 2015 at 13:01, Dsant <forum@votreservice.com> wrote:
No, because I buy old 32 bits hardware...
Dsant, from France
I'm confused where the expectation comes from that new modern operating systems should run on old obsolete hardware
Isn't that part of the Linux idea - anywhere, anytime ? Linux runs on lots of obsolete hardware.
32 bit hardware is no longer produced - this is the very definition of obsolete.
Fortunately, we don't need 32bit hardware to run 32bit systems.
Now we have clear indications that the use base of 32-bit Linux is reaching minimal levels, I really do not see the justification for the extra work that supporting the 32-bit intel architecture requires
Where do volunteers sign up? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (30.2°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 28.08.2015 15:35, Richard Brown wrote:
On 28 August 2015 at 13:01, Dsant <forum@votreservice.com> wrote:
No, because I buy old 32 bits hardware...
Dsant, from France I'm confused where the expectation comes from that new modern operating systems should run on old obsolete hardware
32 bit hardware is no longer produced - this is the very definition of obsolete.
While it may not see wider use, there is x86 hardware produced which is 32-bit [1]. You can easily run new distributions on it and play with such systems.
Now we have clear indications that the use base of 32-bit Linux is reaching minimal levels, I really do not see the justification for the extra work that supporting the 32-bit intel architecture requires
[1] http://ark.intel.com/de/products/79084/Intel-Quark-SoC-X1000-16K-Cache-400-M... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
ad [1] http://ark.intel.com/de/products/79084/Intel-Quark-SoC-X1000-16K-Cache-400-M... is SoC for microcontrollers and with BUGGY instructions for threading , not usable in any normal distribution -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quark#Segfault_bug + Bonus , all AMD64 cpus support 32bit x86 but nobody want support three architectures in one, 32bit , 64bit and x32 .. i too expensive without real benefits On 28 August 2015 at 16:44, Tobias Klausmann <tobias.johannes.klausmann@mni.thm.de> wrote:
On 28.08.2015 15:35, Richard Brown wrote:
On 28 August 2015 at 13:01, Dsant <forum@votreservice.com> wrote:
No, because I buy old 32 bits hardware...
Dsant, from France
I'm confused where the expectation comes from that new modern operating systems should run on old obsolete hardware
32 bit hardware is no longer produced - this is the very definition of obsolete.
While it may not see wider use, there is x86 hardware produced which is 32-bit [1]. You can easily run new distributions on it and play with such systems.
Now we have clear indications that the use base of 32-bit Linux is reaching minimal levels, I really do not see the justification for the extra work that supporting the 32-bit intel architecture requires
[1] http://ark.intel.com/de/products/79084/Intel-Quark-SoC-X1000-16K-Cache-400-M...
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 28.08.2015 17:23, Ondřej Súkup wrote:
ad [1] http://ark.intel.com/de/products/79084/Intel-Quark-SoC-X1000-16K-Cache-400-M...
is SoC for microcontrollers and with BUGGY instructions for threading , not usable in any normal distribution -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quark#Segfault_bug
Compile glibc with -march=i486 which is indeed not a desired behavior, but with this done Opensuse 13.2 works fine on the Quark X1000 (Intel Galileo Board)! This could be done as a replacement for the normal glibc, to provide full featured distributions for such systems.
+ Bonus , all AMD64 cpus support 32bit x86 but nobody want support three architectures in one, 32bit , 64bit and x32 .. i too expensive without real benefits
On 28 August 2015 at 16:44, Tobias Klausmann <tobias.johannes.klausmann@mni.thm.de> wrote:
On 28.08.2015 15:35, Richard Brown wrote:
On 28 August 2015 at 13:01, Dsant <forum@votreservice.com> wrote:
No, because I buy old 32 bits hardware...
Dsant, from France I'm confused where the expectation comes from that new modern operating systems should run on old obsolete hardware
32 bit hardware is no longer produced - this is the very definition of obsolete.
While it may not see wider use, there is x86 hardware produced which is 32-bit [1]. You can easily run new distributions on it and play with such systems.
Now we have clear indications that the use base of 32-bit Linux is reaching minimal levels, I really do not see the justification for the extra work that supporting the 32-bit intel architecture requires
[1] http://ark.intel.com/de/products/79084/Intel-Quark-SoC-X1000-16K-Cache-400-M...
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hi Tobias, Am 28.08.2015 um 17:53 schrieb Tobias Klausmann:
On 28.08.2015 17:23, Ondřej Súkup wrote:
ad [1] http://ark.intel.com/de/products/79084/Intel-Quark-SoC-X1000-16K-Cache-400-M...
is SoC for microcontrollers and with BUGGY instructions for threading , not usable in any normal distribution -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quark#Segfault_bug
Compile glibc with -march=i486 which is indeed not a desired behavior, but with this done Opensuse 13.2 works fine on the Quark X1000 (Intel Galileo Board)! This could be done as a replacement for the normal glibc, to provide full featured distributions for such systems.
Do you actually have openSUSE running on a Galileo board, or is this just theory? I tried to get i586 openSUSE running as a Hackweek project [1] and never succeeded. Which grub, which kernel, ...? Thanks, Andreas [1] https://hackweek.suse.com/12/projects/928 -- SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 07.09.2015 23:52, Andreas Färber wrote:
Hi Tobias,
Am 28.08.2015 um 17:53 schrieb Tobias Klausmann:
On 28.08.2015 17:23, Ondřej Súkup wrote:
ad [1] http://ark.intel.com/de/products/79084/Intel-Quark-SoC-X1000-16K-Cache-400-M...
is SoC for microcontrollers and with BUGGY instructions for threading , not usable in any normal distribution -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quark#Segfault_bug Compile glibc with -march=i486 which is indeed not a desired behavior, but with this done Opensuse 13.2 works fine on the Quark X1000 (Intel Galileo Board)! This could be done as a replacement for the normal glibc, to provide full featured distributions for such systems. Do you actually have openSUSE running on a Galileo board, or is this just theory? I tried to get i586 openSUSE running as a Hackweek project [1] and never succeeded.
Which grub, which kernel, ...?
Thanks, Andreas
Hi Andreas, no this was not just theory, i have a repo which has, maybe had a working 13.2 image ready [1] (havent looked for some time if the image still works) for a Galileo Gen 1. Things done: - ported most parts of the kernel patches from the Yocto Linux to the latest stable kernel (3.18.5 at that time), named kernel-galileo. The patches are not really clean, but as of now, this shouldnt matter as newer kernels should work with the Galileo anyway! - Adjusted glibc with the -march=i486 (i am looking for a better version though). - Modify kiwi to build smaller appliances especially for the Galileo - Create a tiny appliance which boots on a Galileo machine with several different sizes predefined (4, 8, 16, 32GB root fs size) [2]. The outcome was a small appliance with software for a first boot, after that you could easily do a zypper in or zypper up (glibc had to be locked though). [1] https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor/home:tobijk:Galileo:13.2 [2] http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/tobijk:/Galileo:/13.2/images... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/28/2015 08:35 AM, Richard Brown wrote:
I'm confused where the expectation comes from that new modern operating systems should run on old obsolete hardware
32 bit hardware is no longer produced - this is the very definition of obsolete.
Now we have clear indications that the use base of 32-bit Linux is reaching minimal levels, I really do not see the justification for the extra work that supporting the 32-bit intel architecture requires
I have been a SuSE/openSUSE user since the 5.X days. Originally, I started with SuSE because it had reiserfs. As I had used crash-friendly file systems since long before Linus Torvalds started his work, I had no patience for the extended fsck recovery times of ext2 after every crash. I have run other distros for testing purposes, but I never found one I liked better. In my work as a driver developer, only when the last 32-bit Linux system is safely in a museum, will I be able to stop testing 32-bit versions. As much of the world cannot afford the latest shiny boxes, that will take a while. Even in the city (Kansas City, Kansas) where Google first offered gigabit broadband connections, a non-profit organization where I volunteer is still refurbishing and reselling 32-bit machines at minimal cost to low-income users. For my testing, I still have 3 old laptops with 32-bit CPUs. If openSUSE stops producing 32-bit releases, my options are to (1) keep those boxes at 13.2 or Evergreen, or (2) find a distro that still supports them. As long as there are 32-bit versions of openSUSE in maintenance, I can defer the choice, but it seems that some hard decisions are in my future. Larry -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday 28 of August 2015 10:28:11 Larry Finger wrote:
As much of the world cannot afford the latest shiny boxes, that will take a while.
People, please... Some of these "latest shiny boxes" you are talking about are over 10 years old. They do not shine at all and a lot of them has been discarded since years ago. OK, I don't deny there are still people using 32-bit hardware (even if I'm very sceptical about number of those) but calling 64-bit machines in general "latest shiny boxes"? Seriously? Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Friday 28 of August 2015 10:28:11 Larry Finger wrote:
As much of the world cannot afford the latest shiny boxes, that will take a while.
People, please... Some of these "latest shiny boxes" you are talking about are over 10 years old. They do not shine at all and a lot of them has been discarded since years ago. OK, I don't deny there are still people using 32-bit hardware (even if I'm very sceptical about number of those) but calling 64-bit machines in general "latest shiny boxes"? Seriously?
I would tend to agree, I doubt if I could find a 32bit laptop from any refurbisher around here. 32bit-only servers still pop up from time to time, there is always an HP DL380 G3 to be found on Ricardo. (the real ebay in Switzerland). -- Per Jessen, Zürich (23.2°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-08-28 17:38 (UTC+0200):
Larry Finger wrote:
As much of the world cannot afford the latest shiny boxes, that will take a while.
People, please... Some of these "latest shiny boxes" you are talking about are over 10 years old. They do not shine at all and a lot of them has been discarded since years ago. OK, I don't deny there are still people using 32-bit hardware (even if I'm very sceptical about number of those) but calling 64-bit machines in general "latest shiny boxes"? Seriously?
Not everyone who needs a PC gets to buy or even choose one. If it's new to them, it's new, and maybe shiny as well. What they can much more likely choose is the FOSS they put on what they do have. Whichever major distro is the first to drop 32 bit becomes to those people the distro for the elite. Those that fall freely into the hands of such people likely got some sort of refurbing at the hands of people keeping things simple as practical, likely using the same arch for everything crossing their paths. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am Freitag, 28. August 2015, 23:49:33 schrieb Felix Miata:
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-08-28 17:38 (UTC+0200):
Larry Finger wrote:
As much of the world cannot afford the latest shiny boxes, that will take a while.
People, please... Some of these "latest shiny boxes" you are talking about are over 10 years old. They do not shine at all and a lot of them has been discarded since years ago. OK, I don't deny there are still people using 32-bit hardware (even if I'm very sceptical about number of those) but calling 64-bit machines in general "latest shiny boxes"? Seriously?
Not everyone who needs a PC gets to buy or even choose one. If it's new to them, it's new, and maybe shiny as well. What they can much more likely choose is the FOSS they put on what they do have. Whichever major distro is the first to drop 32 bit becomes to those people the distro for the elite.
... Red Hat Enterprise Linux has dropped x86 32bit support with the release of RHEL7, and I wouldn't be too surprised if the RHEL7-Descendants (CentOS, Scientific Linux) followed suit. Cheers MH -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Mathias Homann composed on 2015-08-29 07:35 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata composed on 2015-08-28 23:49 (UTC-0400):
Not everyone who needs a PC gets to buy or even choose one. If it's new to them, it's new, and maybe shiny as well. What they can much more likely choose is the FOSS they put on what they do have. Whichever major distro is the first to drop 32 bit becomes to those people the distro for the elite.
... Red Hat Enterprise Linux has dropped x86 32bit support with the release of RHEL7
When I use the word "distro", it's referring to FOSS. SLE and RHEL are not FOSS as I understand its meaning. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 3:23 AM, Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> wrote:
When I use the word "distro", it's referring to FOSS. SLE and RHEL are not FOSS as I understand its meaning.
they *are* FOSS for are practical purposes. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 08:44, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 3:23 AM, Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> wrote:
When I use the word "distro", it's referring to FOSS. SLE and RHEL are not FOSS as I understand its meaning.
they *are* FOSS for are practical purposes.
You can not install them in refurbished machines, those given to people with scarce resources, or in the third world. Or is SUSE giving OS donations? - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXhpjgACgkQja8UbcUWM1xZiAD/bYcj+FeGdbmsfEdmXs9Nc1T4 qNVlfTj8p1ez4AgLPTkBAIgBNgSdyq6C9qpqI21pSbfeLPkq082KThy/u3EieE3K =772k -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 02:31:52PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
You can not install them in refurbished machines, those given to people with scarce resources, or in the third world. Or is SUSE giving OS donations?
SUSE is not selling SLE licenses, you can download it and install it anywhere you wish. What are customers paying for are support subscriptions, not software licenses. As for RHEL, the most obvious proof that it's FOSS is the very existence of CentOS (or was - before Red Hat took part in it). Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 18:07, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 02:31:52PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
You can not install them in refurbished machines, those given to people with scarce resources, or in the third world. Or is SUSE giving OS donations?
SUSE is not selling SLE licenses, you can download it and install it anywhere you wish. What are customers paying for are support subscriptions, not software licenses.
I know that. It doesn't change the meaning of what I said: you can not install SLES/SLED in donated machines for people with scarce resources, because they can't keep them updated. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXh/dsACgkQja8UbcUWM1xOrgD/aTPNCUn8iGZq8MmN2sXh9JG8 yVadH8W+kYSrXSMUcsgA/jG9w3QcuU8+6D+CEy1DSkOBlAcueguqbi99mpx6/Bg7 =Y1nQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 08:45:48PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-29 18:07, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 02:31:52PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
You can not install them in refurbished machines, those given to people with scarce resources, or in the third world. Or is SUSE giving OS donations?
SUSE is not selling SLE licenses, you can download it and install it anywhere you wish. What are customers paying for are support subscriptions, not software licenses.
I know that. It doesn't change the meaning of what I said: you can not install SLES/SLED in donated machines for people with scarce resources, because they can't keep them updated.
...which doesn't mean the software isn't FOSS. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am 28.08.15 um 17:38 schrieb Michal Kubecek:
People, please... Some of these "latest shiny boxes" you are talking about are over 10 years old. well long discussion about it, still no result.
But the truth is, that a ThinkPad T60 or X60s with Core Duo and 4 GB RAM plus SSD still is a very good system for doing daily work. After Windows XP was discontinued, I mirgrated 6 or 7 systems lilke these to openSUSE (32 bit) and all people using them are happy with what they have now. It's just doinig what it should and I mostly have no work with it. Unfortunately only for 18 month, then I have to do a "major" system upgrade was all possible problems. In my office we are using CentOS because of that, but personally I like openSUSE much more. So Leap would be THE solution and I'm waiting for it to install it (at least RC1) and, a 32 bit version also would be _very_ welcome (CentOS 7 also will be available as 32 bit version)! So just my 2 cent ... -- kind regards, Thorolf -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-10-13 10:52, Thorolf Godawa wrote:
But the truth is, that a ThinkPad T60 or X60s with Core Duo and 4 GB RAM plus SSD still is a very good system for doing daily work.
That's a 32 bit cpu from 2006-2008. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlYc/hkACgkQja8UbcUWM1zP3wD/Q8JX3E+QFr2RUi1PkQl9lCyD lIpJoeqNBj0uOopHxW8BAIIQm1Q6QZDTglBt809a6/S7rcQQnS2t6VRZTqBMoKA4 =YYEJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2015-10-13 at 14:50 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-10-13 10:52, Thorolf Godawa wrote:
But the truth is, that a ThinkPad T60 or X60s with Core Duo and 4 GB RAM plus SSD still is a very good system for doing daily work.
That's a 32 bit cpu from 2006-2008.
No, the whole Intel Core microarchitecture is 64Bits. I'm running 64Bit TW on a Core2Duo MacBook (Penryn T8xxx) just fine.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 13 October 2015 at 15:26, Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de> wrote:
On Tue, 2015-10-13 at 14:50 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-10-13 10:52, Thorolf Godawa wrote:
But the truth is, that a ThinkPad T60 or X60s with Core Duo and 4 GB RAM plus SSD still is a very good system for doing daily work.
That's a 32 bit cpu from 2006-2008.
No, the whole Intel Core microarchitecture is 64Bits. I'm running 64Bit TW on a Core2Duo MacBook (Penryn T8xxx) just fine.
Core Duo (Yonah) = 32-bit Core 2 Duo = 64-bit Source: wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yonah_(microprocessor) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2015-10-13 at 15:31 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
On 13 October 2015 at 15:26, Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de> wrote:
On Tue, 2015-10-13 at 14:50 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-10-13 10:52, Thorolf Godawa wrote:
But the truth is, that a ThinkPad T60 or X60s with Core Duo and 4 GB RAM plus SSD still is a very good system for doing daily work.
That's a 32 bit cpu from 2006-2008.
No, the whole Intel Core microarchitecture is 64Bits. I'm running 64Bit TW on a Core2Duo MacBook (Penryn T8xxx) just fine.
Core Duo (Yonah) = 32-bit Core 2 Duo = 64-bit
Ah sorrt, I misread. My fault
Source: wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yonah_(microprocessor)
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 13 October 2015 at 10:52, Thorolf Godawa <nospam@godawa.de> wrote:
Am 28.08.15 um 17:38 schrieb Michal Kubecek:
People, please... Some of these "latest shiny boxes" you are talking about are over 10 years old. well long discussion about it, still no result.
But the truth is, that a ThinkPad T60 or X60s with Core Duo and 4 GB RAM plus SSD still is a very good system for doing daily work.
After Windows XP was discontinued, I mirgrated 6 or 7 systems lilke these to openSUSE (32 bit) and all people using them are happy with what they have now.
It's just doinig what it should and I mostly have no work with it.
Unfortunately only for 18 month, then I have to do a "major" system upgrade was all possible problems.
In my office we are using CentOS because of that, but personally I like openSUSE much more.
So Leap would be THE solution and I'm waiting for it to install it (at least RC1) and, a 32 bit version also would be _very_ welcome (CentOS 7 also will be available as 32 bit version)!
CentOS 7 is only available as a 64-bit version https://wiki.centos.org/Download I hear rumours of a 'community created' 32-bit version, but like this thread has spelled out several times now, we're open to that idea at openSUSE too, just none of those people previously involved in making our releases is interested in it.. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:02, Richard Brown <RBrownCCB@...> wrote:
On 13 October 2015 at 10:52, Thorolf Godawa <nospam@godawa.de> wrote:
Am 28.08.15 um 17:38 schrieb Michal Kubecek:
People, please... Some of these "latest shiny boxes" you are talking about are over 10 years old. ...
CentOS 7 is only available as a 64-bit version
https://wiki.centos.org/Download
I hear rumours of a 'community created' 32-bit version, but like this thread has spelled out several times now, we're open to that idea at openSUSE too, just none of those people previously involved in making our releases is interested in it..
Announcement today: C7 for 32bit available as AltArch: Wiki: (there are some Bugs, please read beforehand) https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/AltArch/i386 DL-ISO: http://mirror.centos.org/altarch/7/isos/i386/ LEAP 42.1 will get some AltArchs sooner or later: AArch64, arm7, ppc64, etc. IMHO there is the place where the x86_32 arch should reside. - Yamaban. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am 13.10.15 um 15:02 schrieb Richard Brown:
CentOS 7 is only available as a 64-bit version
https://wiki.centos.org/Download well, it was available as beta for some time, but because I use CentOS exclusively on servers, the 32-bit version of CentOS 7 is not important for me.
Beginning with CentOS 6 I installed all servers with the 64-bit version and for servers 64-bit are mandatory and (really) old hardware is nothing you have to take care in business use. But as I mentioned before, for personal use an old laptop or PC, even with a 32-bit CPU is an suitable option! And for these systems, openSUSE is one of the best options to use, preferable as LTE version.
I hear rumours of a 'community created' 32-bit version, but like this thread has spelled out several times now, we're open to that idea at openSUSE too, just none of those people previously involved in making our releases is interested in it.. Just got this:
Betreff: [CentOS-announce] CentOS Linux 7 for 32-bit x86 (i386) Architecture Datum: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 11:07:17 -0500 Von: Johnny Hughes <johnny@centos.org> Antwort an: centos@centos.org Organisation: The CentOS Project An: CentOS-Announce <centos-announce@centos.org> We would like to announce the general availability of CentOS Linux 7 for the 32-bit x86 (i386) architecture. This is the first major release of the 32 bit x86 by the AltArch Special Interest Group. This release is based on the Source Code from the CentOS 7 (1503) x86_64 architecture and includes all current updates from the main CentOS 7 tree. Installation ============ Install ISOs are available here: http://mirror.centos.org/altarch/7/isos/i386/ sha256sums: CentOS-7-i386-DVD-1503.iso: 8973b31b45878b2277c19465b0260aab4efb86126033ee0909fafa47ace5c3af CentOS-7-i386-Everything-1503.iso: 1c016cd95aaa8fe9bc68376f388c03c704eacd3f303e7f37f026e6aed4f78b77 CentOS-7-i386-Minimal-1503.iso: 4b71900eda2e863234e2edee9b2c3753f83bc9a0912551d26f69ff1e202ca979 CentOS-7-i386-NetInstall-1503.iso: cea236c94a26e62330acbbf8fe0e1aefa75f282fdbaab7f169213e8fb33d2cc4 The install process is identical to CentOS 7 x86_64 via kickstart or ISO installers. ... -- kind regards, Thorolf -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am 13.10.15 um 15:02 schrieb Richard Brown:
CentOS 7 is only available as a 64-bit version
https://wiki.centos.org/Download well, it was available as beta for some time, but because I use CentOS exclusively on servers, the 32-bit version of CentOS 7 is not important for me.
Beginning with CentOS 6 I installed all servers with the 64-bit version and for servers 64-bit are mandatory and (really) old hardware is nothing you have to take care in business use. But as I mentioned before, for personal use an old laptop or PC, even with a 32-bit CPU is an suitable option! And for these systems, openSUSE is one of the best options to use, preferable as LTE version.
I hear rumours of a 'community created' 32-bit version, but like this thread has spelled out several times now, we're open to that idea at openSUSE too, just none of those people previously involved in making our releases is interested in it.. Just got this:
Betreff: [CentOS-announce] CentOS Linux 7 for 32-bit x86 (i386) Architecture Datum: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 11:07:17 -0500 Von: Johnny Hughes <johnny@centos.org> Antwort an: centos@centos.org Organisation: The CentOS Project An: CentOS-Announce <centos-announce@centos.org> We would like to announce the general availability of CentOS Linux 7 for the 32-bit x86 (i386) architecture. This is the first major release of the 32 bit x86 by the AltArch Special Interest Group. This release is based on the Source Code from the CentOS 7 (1503) x86_64 architecture and includes all current updates from the main CentOS 7 tree. Installation ============ Install ISOs are available here: http://mirror.centos.org/altarch/7/isos/i386/ sha256sums: CentOS-7-i386-DVD-1503.iso: 8973b31b45878b2277c19465b0260aab4efb86126033ee0909fafa47ace5c3af CentOS-7-i386-Everything-1503.iso: 1c016cd95aaa8fe9bc68376f388c03c704eacd3f303e7f37f026e6aed4f78b77 CentOS-7-i386-Minimal-1503.iso: 4b71900eda2e863234e2edee9b2c3753f83bc9a0912551d26f69ff1e202ca979 CentOS-7-i386-NetInstall-1503.iso: cea236c94a26e62330acbbf8fe0e1aefa75f282fdbaab7f169213e8fb33d2cc4 The install process is identical to CentOS 7 x86_64 via kickstart or ISO installers. ... -- kind regards, Thorolf -- Chau y hasta luego, Thorolf -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown composed on 2015-08-28 15:35 (UTC+0200):
I'm confused where the expectation comes from that new modern operating systems should run on old obsolete hardware
"New" and "modern" aren't always what users actually want. A lot of upgrades happen for security reasons, and to avoid functional regression. Web sites break in browsers "too old". -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-08-28 13:01, Dsant wrote:
On 08/28/2015 10:30 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
That's exactly what I suspected: most people using 32-bit distributions these days actually do so because of their beliefs, not because they have to.
No, because I buy old 32 bits hardware...
Are you also paying old utility bills? :) Of course, it depends on what percentage of time the machine is running and it varies among countries, but you might want to include the cost of the electricity consumed in your buying decisions. Besides, old x86_64 hardware has been available for some time now as well. Michal -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/01/2015 11:09 AM, Michal Marek wrote:
Besides, old x86_64 hardware has been available for some time now as well.
Quite so. I bought a refurb HP 64 bit system last year for $100. It came with Windows 7 Home, but I replaced it with openSUSE 13.1 and used the W7 licence elsewhere. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-08-28 10:30 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata wrote:
I remember seeing plenty of threads around where this sort of topic has come up, and seeing lots of people still using 32 bit by preference on their 64 bit systems.
That's exactly what I suspected: most people using 32-bit distributions these days actually do so because of their beliefs, not because they have to. Such use is certainly legitimate - but way less relevant for the question whether we should support the architecture.
Maybe there are more "have tos" than you think. Did upgrading an existing 32 bit installation to 64 bit ever become a supported option? I don't recall any such thing. I find upgrades far less painful than fresh installations. Probably other 32 bit preferrers do too.
It seems to me any acknowledgement would primarily be that the majority of developers don't want to bother with less than the newest and fastest machines,
Newest and fastest? 64-bit CPU's are widely available since ~2003 and prevailing since ~2005, for last 5 years, it's almost impossible to buy a 32-bit one.
The point was that devs who might otherwise wish to at least test on older systems find plenty reasons not to spend the time, among which waiting on slower RAM, CPU and I/O busses, not to mention logistics of keeping older equipment functional and pragmatically available.
And again, it's not about "fastest". The tricks kernel has to do to cope with 32-bit architecture are quite ugly. There are even problems that can't be resolved on i586 (I remember a guy having over 60% of his 2GB RAM unused but unable to add a netfilter rule because of memory allocation failure). You have fewer registers, leading to much less efficient function calling convention etc.
largely I'll bet to compensate for software bloat, driving the cycle that makes vendors happy, but not so much users, particularly those on tight budgets.
Seriously?
I never asked for compositing, the bling it enables, or the speed and RAM they depend on. KDE3 and TDE still match my needs as well as ever, unlike KDE4 and Plasma5. Did the kernel really need to more than double in size in 8 years[1], plucking so much out of userspace? Or was that growth a consequence of software bloat needing compensatory assistance to keep newer, faster PCs from seeming slower? There do still exist people who don't like having fixed what ain't broke. :-) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel#/media/File:Lines_of_Code_Linux_K... -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, Am Samstag, 29. August 2015 schrieb Felix Miata:
Maybe there are more "have tos" than you think. Did upgrading an existing 32 bit installation to 64 bit ever become a supported option? I don't recall any such thing.
It isn't officially supported, but I know that some people (including me) did it successfully, so it should work ;-) For an upgrade with an arch change, I'd recommend to boot from DVD / USB stick to do an "offline" upgrade (zypper dup probably isn't the best idea in this case)
I find upgrades far less painful than fresh installations.
Agreed - for me, the only reason for a fresh install is when I get new hardware. For everything else, there's zypper dup ;-) Regards, Christian Boltz -- ... you start off with a typical message, let's say a 2.5MB Word document containing three lines of text and a macro virus ... [Peter Gutmann] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 05:52:20PM +0200, Christian Boltz wrote:
Hello,
Am Samstag, 29. August 2015 schrieb Felix Miata:
Maybe there are more "have tos" than you think. Did upgrading an existing 32 bit installation to 64 bit ever become a supported option? I don't recall any such thing.
It isn't officially supported, but I know that some people (including me) did it successfully, so it should work ;-)
I suppose if we don't release an official i586 Leap image, we should consider testing and supporting the i586 13.2 -> x86_64 Leap migration, either direct or two-step one (via x86_64 13.2). Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 18:30, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 05:52:20PM +0200, Christian Boltz wrote:
It isn't officially supported, but I know that some people (including me) did it successfully, so it should work ;-)
And me. :-) Worked fine. Offline upgrade, followed by a zypper dup, then a search and catch of all the remaining x86 packages. Not point and click and watch it go by :-)
I suppose if we don't release an official i586 Leap image, we should consider testing and supporting the i586 13.2 -> x86_64 Leap migration, either direct or two-step one (via x86_64 13.2).
That would be a nice idea :-) - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXh/ogACgkQja8UbcUWM1wyDgD/YFk6qBucLjJEGmBtBMhLuXv2 sibPSD6VgXO4GqNgsioA/i/8nKyjo6HrLQMMJd2LOLvBSl5g3pekuRVh/t+nRzXd =iduq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 03:16:41 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
Last I checked every distrowatch listing above openSUSE still provided a 32 bit version, and IIRC, it was necessary to drop below the top 10 to find one that didn't.
Distrowatch is not a measure of distribution popularity or userbase. Distrowatch is a page counter that measures the popularity of pages for particular distributions on distrowatch. That's all they measure. People seem to think that there's some magic about Distrowatch rankings that has something to do with how many people run a particular distribution. That's entirely false.
From the distrowatch "Page Hit Ranking" page:
"The DistroWatch Page Hit Ranking statistics are a light-hearted way of measuring the popularity of Linux distributions and other free operating systems among the visitors of this website. They correlate neither to usage nor to quality and should not be used to measure the market share of distributions. They simply show the number of times a distribution page on DistroWatch.com was accessed each day, nothing more." I get really tired of people confusing Distrowatch's statistics with distribution popularity or other such metrics. If I visit the Fedora page, it counts a hit on the Fedora page. I'm not using Fedora, but I might have a question about what the latest version is or what's included in it, and distrowatch can tell me that. Since I don't use Fedora at all, it's an incorrect assumption to draw that the increase I give the Fedora page by visiting that page has anything to do with the number of people using Fedora. Interest in a distribution is not the same as using it. That is obvious. Understanding that Distrowatch at best measures *interest* and not *usage* seems to be far less obvious to a lot of people. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 03:16:41AM -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-08-28 08:48 (UTC+0200):
I'm afraid discontinuing i586 would be something I would call acknowledging the state of things and stopping pretending rather than some big and groundbreaking step.
Last I checked every distrowatch listing above openSUSE still provided a 32 bit version, and IIRC, it was necessary to drop below the top 10 to find one that didn't. Fedora still calls its 386.
They may call it so but as 386 CPU support in mainline kernel was dropped in December 2012, I seriously doubt they make the effort to keep maintaining all the hacks needed to actually run on 386. Btw, out of curiosity, I checked other major distributions. Ubuntu plans to phase out 32-bit after their 16.04 release (April 2016) (not definitive yet) and Fedora already had a proposal to drop 32-bit starting with Fedora 23 (October 2015) or 24 but they did chicken out for now. So I guess it's much less blasphemy than it looks at the first glance. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz> writes:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 03:16:41AM -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-08-28 08:48 (UTC+0200):
I'm afraid discontinuing i586 would be something I would call acknowledging the state of things and stopping pretending rather than some big and groundbreaking step.
Last I checked every distrowatch listing above openSUSE still provided a 32 bit version, and IIRC, it was necessary to drop below the top 10 to find one that didn't. Fedora still calls its 386.
They may call it so but as 386 CPU support in mainline kernel was dropped in December 2012, I seriously doubt they make the effort to keep maintaining all the hacks needed to actually run on 386.
They actually require 686+. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely different." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-08-28 07:16, Felix Miata wrote:
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-08-28 08:48 (UTC+0200):
I'm afraid discontinuing i586 would be something I would call acknowledging the state of things and stopping pretending rather than some big and groundbreaking step. Last I checked every distrowatch listing above openSUSE still provided a 32 bit version, and IIRC, it was necessary to drop below the top 10 to find one that didn't. Fedora still calls its 386. I remember seeing plenty of threads around where this sort of topic has come up, and seeing lots of people still using 32 bit by preference on their 64 bit systems. It seems to me any acknowledgement would primarily be that the majority of developers don't want to bother with less than the newest and fastest machines, largely I'll bet to compensate for software bloat, driving the cycle that makes vendors happy, but not so much users, particularly those on tight budgets. It won't surprise me if whichever top 10 distro first dumps 32 bit falls at least 2 spots in short order, unless several do it in short order.
There is a 32-bit bug wanting some love https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=956129 which is why 32-bit build is disabled atm: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/345512 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Friday 28 of August 2015 02:04:31 Felix Miata wrote:
If I understand this, it means 32 bit users when 13.2 support and Evergreen support expire either switch to another distro
...or switch to the native architecture, finally.
switch to the rolling release TW...
I guess the only thing that really surprises me is that dropping i586 hasn't been done in Tumbleweed first.
or risk non-support?
As I wrote already some time ago, I'm not very confident about the level of i586 openSUSE support we have been providing for the last few years. Sure, we may run it through openQA (actually, I'm not even sure about that) but how many beta testers run it on their machines (compared to x86_64)?
If the level of testing and/or QA is an indicator for whether we should include <something>, there are a lot things that need to left out.
How likely are you going to get help with an i586-specific bug?
Well, how likely am I to hit an i586-specific bug? Also, if the probability of getting timely help with an xxx-specific bug is an indicator, many things should be left out. IMHO, neither is an applicable argument. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.4°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, On Aug 28 02:04 Felix Miata wrote (excerpt):
Werner Flamme composed on 2015-08-28 06:48 (UTC+0200):
Stephan Kulow composed:
... 32 bit ... is to be expected?
I don't plan to create one at all
I see. Since SLE 12 is 64 bit only, it would be quite a lot of work to create a 32 bit branch for Leap.
If I understand this, it means 32 bit users when 13.2 support and Evergreen support expire either switch to another distro, switch to the rolling release TW, or risk non-support?
It seems your underlying assumption is that you have some kind of "right" to demand 32 bit support from SUSE. I wrote intentionally SUSE not openSUSE. With SUSE I mean that SUSE employees do the lot of work to create a 32 bit branch for Leap. But openSUSE is a free project. I assume there is nothing in openSUSE that forbids that a group of openSUSE users could do the lot of work to create and maintain a 32 bit branch for Leap? What I like to tell is: If a group of openSUSE users has needs that are not fulfilled by SUSE then that group of openSUSE users can usually do it on its own (provided it is not against openSUSE policies). As far as I know Evergreen is done this way. Perhaps it is much easier to contribute to Evergreen to get and keep support for released 32 bit versions via Evergreen as long as needed. Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
I wonder what might happen for things that are cross-compiled on OBS. Like all the MinGW stuff. I would imagine that there is no reason that the 32-bit compiles of the Windows versions of things could not continue on 64-bit hosts. We actually use those things. I do not know that all our users have 64-bit Windows installed. Roger Oberholtzer RST Systems Office: +46 (0)10-615 6020 Mobile: +46 (0)70-815 1696 roger.oberholtzer@ramboll.se ________________________________________ Ramböll Sverige AB Krukmakargatan 21 P.O. Box 17009 SE-104 62 Stockholm, Sweden www.rambollrst.se -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Johannes Meixner wrote:
What I like to tell is: If a group of openSUSE users has needs that are not fulfilled by SUSE then that group of openSUSE users can usually do it on its own (provided it is not against openSUSE policies).
Actually, when a group of openSUSE users have needs that are not fulfilled by openSUSE, they might vote with their feet. Anyway, I've voluntered to help with release engineering before, I can do it again. I'll be happy to help with keeping 32bit openSUSE alive. I doubt if I can drive it, I don't think I have the necessary skills & insight. Yet. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (23.1°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, On Aug 28 10:07 Per Jessen wrote (excerpt):
Actually, when a group of openSUSE users have needs that are not fulfilled by openSUSE, they might vote with their feet.
Of course! openSUSE is a free project and its users can do what they like (within the project's policies). I don't know if "voting with the feets" is excatly within the project's policies but I assume there exists some kind of voting mechanism in openSUSE to make decisions ;-) Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:23:58 +0200, Johannes Meixner wrote:
I don't know if "voting with the feets" is excatly within the project's policies but I assume there exists some kind of voting mechanism in openSUSE to make decisions ;-)
Maybe the phrase doesn't translate - "voting with your feet" means that when something doesn't meet your needs, you go somewhere else to get something that does. What Per is saying is that if people who want x86 support from openSUSE don't get it, they'll find a distro that does. Which, if the stats Richard has are accurate, means we might lose, what, a dozen users? ;) (Exaggeration for effect) Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am 28.08.2015 um 17:40 schrieb Jim Henderson:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:23:58 +0200, Johannes Meixner wrote:
I don't know if "voting with the feets" is excatly within the project's policies but I assume there exists some kind of voting mechanism in openSUSE to make decisions ;-)
Maybe the phrase doesn't translate - "voting with your feet" means that when something doesn't meet your needs, you go somewhere else to get something that does.
What Per is saying is that if people who want x86 support from openSUSE don't get it, they'll find a distro that does.
Which, if the stats Richard has are accurate, means we might lose, what, a dozen users? ;) (Exaggeration for effect)
Jim
This poll is not representative but might give an answer to the question about user numbers: http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?myaction=SeeVote&issue=20150629#poll btw. I'm still using 32bit hardware every day. Hendrik -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 18:03:10 +0200, Hendrik Woltersdorf wrote:
This poll is not representative but might give an answer to the question about user numbers:
Not really, because it's not openSUSE-specific. The actual download numbers for 32-bit openSUSE would be better guidance. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Not really, because it's not openSUSE-specific.
The actual download numbers for 32-bit openSUSE would be better guidance.
no , is same across whole world On 28 August 2015 at 18:21, Jim Henderson <hendersj@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 18:03:10 +0200, Hendrik Woltersdorf wrote:
This poll is not representative but might give an answer to the question about user numbers:
Not really, because it's not openSUSE-specific.
The actual download numbers for 32-bit openSUSE would be better guidance.
Jim
-- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 18:23:43 +0200 Ondřej Súkup <mimi.vx@gmail.com> wrote:
Not really, because it's not openSUSE-specific.
The actual download numbers for 32-bit openSUSE would be better guidance.
no , is same across whole world
Do you have data to back this up? #justcurious - -- Jan Matějka | QA Engineer for Maintenance SUSE LINUX s.r.o. | https://www.suse.com/ GPG: A33E F5BC A9F6 DAFD 2021 6FB6 3EBF D45B EEB6 CA8B -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJV4I4oAAoJEIN+7RD5ejahF8kH/0rrutCL1TnoXRFZv/bwdLug YPUs3Do4lkZQt8fLlVUHWLZHhm4+Vwu5mmy05EIqI0sYZBlvnDMN8e2PDjgtYbk0 fDCdTrlu/XAu+fEdWTG8zn1UwkENW6MkRjPnCZbYQpQLOh8ouMDDjYKHJbScWQ19 oqKoAiHwKv4tj250i8df1bBhmmA7YLiiD24x2FoflpfPsqgMcaf2u4JSt+6/pE8N Jl7qInv8UCQ5F1jrrjN22JP+w5iN7QApZAfcB0pwkONfCWeTsJwPIM+gK04a0QOb 9WkkfrjIuHeUx3LDN4yrOhGUR/QRMYPo3iwuIrU0q8Zf66r4Bj7jACsW91f87jw= =BFIW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 18:23:43 +0200, Ondřej Súkup wrote:
Not really, because it's not openSUSE-specific.
The actual download numbers for 32-bit openSUSE would be better guidance.
no , is same across whole world
If openSUSE users aren't downloading 32-bit in sufficient volume, that's the more useful measurement. Personally, I don't care how many people around the world use 32-bit systems. I care about the number of people who use openSUSE who use 32- bit systems, and that number, according to Richard, has been shrinking, even though 13.x provides a 32-bit version. The decline - and rate of decline - is the important measure. Supporting a 32-bit platform until nobody is using 32-bit platforms around the world is a demonstrably silly idea. That said, though, if there's a group of users who want to continue to build a 32-bit version, that's cool. Let it be like the Pi versions, or the other non-official builds like Evergreen or the education version. That's what open source is all about. I got rid of my last 32-bit system many years ago. When I was laid off, I had to scrape together enough money to buy a laptop, and I bought a 64- bit system for a pretty good price. I wouldn't say I was in poverty, but I certainly had to watch every penny I spent. My oldest system here is 10 years old; it's a 64-bit AMD system that maxes out at 2 GB of RAM - the system board won't support more. We go through this every time an architecture becomes obsolete - it happened with i386 support was dropped (an easy decision since the kernel dropped support for it), but there were a handful of people who said "but *I* still use an 80386 system! What about me?" - using a system that's out of date limits your options in a lot of ways. We also can't use old microchannel hardware any more, or EISA-bus cards. That's life in the technology space - things change, and you either keep up with the times, or you find your choices limited. I don't say that to be "mean" or anything - it's just the reality of the situation. If you have a platform that accounts for 90% of use and one that accounts for 20%, you don't allocate equal resources to the platform that has 10% - that's a poor way of managing resources. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Dne 28.08.2015 v 18:38 Jim Henderson napsal(a):
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 18:23:43 +0200, Ondřej Súkup wrote:
Not really, because it's not openSUSE-specific.
The actual download numbers for 32-bit openSUSE would be better guidance.
no , is same across whole world
If openSUSE users aren't downloading 32-bit in sufficient volume, that's the more useful measurement.
Personally, I don't care how many people around the world use 32-bit systems. I care about the number of people who use openSUSE who use 32- bit systems, and that number, according to Richard, has been shrinking, even though 13.x provides a 32-bit version.
The decline - and rate of decline - is the important measure. Supporting a 32-bit platform until nobody is using 32-bit platforms around the world is a demonstrably silly idea.
That said, though, if there's a group of users who want to continue to build a 32-bit version, that's cool. Let it be like the Pi versions, or the other non-official builds like Evergreen or the education version. That's what open source is all about.
I got rid of my last 32-bit system many years ago. When I was laid off, I had to scrape together enough money to buy a laptop, and I bought a 64- bit system for a pretty good price. I wouldn't say I was in poverty, but I certainly had to watch every penny I spent.
My oldest system here is 10 years old; it's a 64-bit AMD system that maxes out at 2 GB of RAM - the system board won't support more.
We go through this every time an architecture becomes obsolete - it happened with i386 support was dropped (an easy decision since the kernel dropped support for it), but there were a handful of people who said "but *I* still use an 80386 system! What about me?" - using a system that's out of date limits your options in a lot of ways. We also can't use old microchannel hardware any more, or EISA-bus cards.
That's life in the technology space - things change, and you either keep up with the times, or you find your choices limited. I don't say that to be "mean" or anything - it's just the reality of the situation.
If you have a platform that accounts for 90% of use and one that accounts for 20%, you don't allocate equal resources to the platform that has 10% - that's a poor way of managing resources.
+1 Simple bugzilla search shows that this year, following numbers of issues were reported for Tumbleweed (and had architecture specified) x86_64: 233 i386, i586, i686: 6 Note that although number of repors for TW is much larger (878), architecture is not specified in most cases, but ratio suggests that amount of 32-bit systems is bellow 3%. Cheers Martin Pluskal
On 08/28/2015 06:59 PM, Martin Pluskal wrote:
Simple bugzilla search shows that this year, following numbers of issues were reported for Tumbleweed (and had architecture specified) x86_64: 233 i386, i586, i686: 6
Note that although number of repors for TW is much larger (878), architecture is not specified in most cases, but ratio suggests that amount of 32-bit systems is bellow 3%.
Cheers
Martin Pluskal
And anyway, the more/less there are people "reporting 32 bits bugs" (to use Martin figures, thanks a lot Martin ! ), the more/less there will be people contributing to OpenSUSE-32. Dsant, from France -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Martin Pluskal <martin@pluskal.org> wrote:
+1 Simple bugzilla search shows that this year, following numbers of issues were reported for Tumbleweed (and had architecture specified) x86_64: 233 i386, i586, i686: 6
Shocking! Bleeding Edge Tumbleweed users aren't using 32-bit. I'm amazed. Seriously, give the 13.1 and 13.2 number over their lifetimes. (I'd do it, but I don't know how to run those searches in bugzilla.) I'm also curious what the breakdown is at SUSESTUDIO. I only publish one appliance there, but it is 32-bit to ensure the widest hardware compatibility, and yes that includes 10+ year old machines. Greg -- Greg Freemyer www.IntelligentAvatar.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Dne 28.08.2015 v 20:59 Greg Freemyer napsal(a):
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Martin Pluskal <martin@pluskal.org> wrote:
+1 Simple bugzilla search shows that this year, following numbers of issues were reported for Tumbleweed (and had architecture specified) x86_64: 233 i386, i586, i686: 6
Shocking! Bleeding Edge Tumbleweed users aren't using 32-bit. I'm amazed.
Seriously, give the 13.1 and 13.2 number over their lifetimes.
Well since you are so pleasant: for 13.1 it's 1432 vs 169 for 13.2 it's 808 vs 42 M
On 28/08/15 21:16, Martin Pluskal wrote:
Dne 28.08.2015 v 20:59 Greg Freemyer napsal(a):
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Martin Pluskal <martin@pluskal.org> wrote:
+1 Simple bugzilla search shows that this year, following numbers of issues were reported for Tumbleweed (and had architecture specified) x86_64: 233 i386, i586, i686: 6
Shocking! Bleeding Edge Tumbleweed users aren't using 32-bit. I'm amazed.
Seriously, give the 13.1 and 13.2 number over their lifetimes.
Well since you are so pleasant: for 13.1 it's 1432 vs 169 for 13.2 it's 808 vs 42
Martin, for 13.2, I see 20 different hardware platforms. With a threshold of 2%, that leaves All - 8.22% Other - 40.45% x86-64 - 42.96%. For 13.1: All - 10.78% Other - 29.07% x86-64 - 48.55% From this I deduce that usage of 64bit platforms is in fact dropping. Do we follow the trend? Mind you, we ought to focus on "Other", there seems to be a solid upward trend there. /Per -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Martin Pluskal <martin@pluskal.org> wrote:
Dne 28.08.2015 v 20:59 Greg Freemyer napsal(a):
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Martin Pluskal <martin@pluskal.org> wrote:
+1 Simple bugzilla search shows that this year, following numbers of issues were reported for Tumbleweed (and had architecture specified) x86_64: 233 i386, i586, i686: 6
Shocking! Bleeding Edge Tumbleweed users aren't using 32-bit. I'm amazed.
Seriously, give the 13.1 and 13.2 number over their lifetimes.
Well since you are so pleasant: for 13.1 it's 1432 vs 169 for 13.2 it's 808 vs 42
M
Martin, I apologize. I was a little flabbergasted you ran 32-bit numbers against tumbleweed since it seemed the least likely to have 32-bit users. So its about 12% for 13.1 and 5% for 13.2 Not sure what it really tells us, but there are people reporting bugs against 32-bit. Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-28 22:44, Greg Freemyer wrote:
So its about 12% for 13.1 and 5% for 13.2
Not sure what it really tells us, but there are people reporting bugs against 32-bit.
Maybe it means that the 32 bit platform has less bugs than the 64 bit platform. Thus we should use 32 bit version, it is far better ;-) :-P - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXg+CsACgkQja8UbcUWM1y16QD/dARsQyQ5netxN/LdsoZuifuy 0u3VnDRjQwV4XqbEo3QA/3gRLhyu8cplx/0DBzVlAReMKJniYH2tcr72bYt82le4 =tfjI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. composed on 2015-08-29 02:09 (UTC+0200):
On 2015-08-28 22:44 (UTC-0400), Greg Freemyer wrote:
So its about 12% for 13.1 and 5% for 13.2
Not sure what it really tells us, but there are people reporting bugs against 32-bit.
Maybe it means that the 32 bit platform has less bugs than the 64 bit platform. Thus we should use 32 bit version, it is far better ;-) :-P
:-D Maybe it means 32 bit users aren't interested in latest and greatest things generally, and/or more interested in not needing to upgrade to a newer distro version when support terminates for their installed release. After all, 13.1 has scheduled to become Evergreen for quite some time. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Dne 29.08.2015 v 4:12 Felix Miata napsal(a):
Carlos E. R. composed on 2015-08-29 02:09 (UTC+0200):
On 2015-08-28 22:44 (UTC-0400), Greg Freemyer wrote:
So its about 12% for 13.1 and 5% for 13.2
Not sure what it really tells us, but there are people reporting bugs against 32-bit.
Maybe it means that the 32 bit platform has less bugs than the 64 bit platform. Thus we should use 32 bit version, it is far better ;-) :-P
:-D
Maybe it means 32 bit users aren't interested in latest and greatest things generally, and/or more interested in not needing to upgrade to a newer distro version when support terminates for their installed release. Then they are on their own - and I don't see what does amount of users using unsupported releases has to do with not building 32-bit leap and moving 32-bit Tumbleweed to ports.
M.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 09:22, Martin Pluskal wrote:
Dne 29.08.2015 v 4:12 Felix Miata napsal(a):
Maybe it means 32 bit users aren't interested in latest and greatest things generally, and/or more interested in not needing to upgrade to a newer distro version when support terminates for their installed release. Then they are on their own - and I don't see what does amount of users using unsupported releases has to do with not building 32-bit leap and moving 32-bit Tumbleweed to ports.
You misunderstood. You removed an important sentence from his paragraph:
After all, 13.1 has scheduled to become Evergreen for quite some time.
Which is true, my 32 bit servers are on Evergreen. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXhqhAACgkQja8UbcUWM1yRfwD/dMcprwRWrsX55gXiH2FaYzB0 V/IlGYg8L8A4qPdMVg0A/0K6vfqD/SYCkKXZzJ+RiCZX/VT6J/t79iP2oMTYLOTz =bfmv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015.08.28 21:12, Felix Miata wrote:
Carlos E. R. composed on 2015-08-29 02:09 (UTC+0200):
So its about 12% for 13.1 and 5% for 13.2 Not sure what it really tells us, but there are people reporting bugs against 32-bit. Maybe it means 32 bit users aren't interested in latest and greatest
On 2015-08-28 22:44 (UTC-0400), Greg Freemyer wrote: things generally, and/or more interested in not needing to upgrade to a newer distro version when support terminates for their installed release. After all, 13.1 has scheduled to become Evergreen for quite some time.
Agreed, writing as a long-time user that does not need latest and greatest all the time! My ASUS Eee PC Tablet -- purchased new in 2011 -- is 32-bit only. But, it has (after upgrades) an SSD and 2 GB of RAM, and ran most openSUSE releases since 11.4. A four year-old netbook that I use regularly doesn't feel that old or obsolete to me, especially when running Linux. I procrastinated on the 13.2 upgrade for no particular reason... so looks like I'll be staying at 13.1 Evergreen. It doesn't really matter to me which release I run; I like using openSUSE in general (running 13.2 or Tumbleweed on several machines) and will continue as long as there are security updates. I completely understand that it is not practical to continue official 32-bit support due to the general direction of the openSUSE project with Leap. Is there a way to make unofficial 32-bit support (e.g. a spin) less time or effort... for example, require a successful build against the "minimal x-window" install pattern, instead of all packages? (I have no idea because I haven't used OBS - I need to learn!) -- Brian Y. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-31 17:46, Brian F. Yulga wrote:
I completely understand that it is not practical to continue official 32-bit support due to the general direction of the openSUSE project with Leap. Is there a way to make unofficial 32-bit support (e.g. a spin) less time or effort... for example, require a successful build against the "minimal x-window" install pattern, instead of all packages? (I have no idea because I haven't used OBS - I need to learn!)
I fear it will be impossible. We can not build it on susestudio because there will be nothing to base it on, no repos to draw from. And I don't know if it is possible to do an install disk on the OBS, if the 32 bit target is removed. We would have to do it all. Absolutely all. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXk41MACgkQja8UbcUWM1wxCQEAms5MwC4D2jxN+az5mbsivN28 cXEgoiX1Ne/3zRXK55gA/jxWCczs8riuu4+LSJdSU3B/BlV4lhqjhh0glT6DRlv7 =lkpj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue 01 Sep 2015 01:29:23 AM CDT, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-31 17:46, Brian F. Yulga wrote:
I completely understand that it is not practical to continue official 32-bit support due to the general direction of the openSUSE project with Leap. Is there a way to make unofficial 32-bit support (e.g. a spin) less time or effort... for example, require a successful build against the "minimal x-window" install pattern, instead of all packages? (I have no idea because I haven't used OBS - I need to learn!)
I fear it will be impossible. We can not build it on susestudio because there will be nothing to base it on, no repos to draw from. And I don't know if it is possible to do an install disk on the OBS, if the 32 bit target is removed. We would have to do it all. Absolutely all.
Hi Huh? You just add the OBS repo to add files/patterns to your SUSE Studio build target... Or create your own OBS, add some workers and build your images locally, all the tools are available to create your own build. -- Cheers Malcolm °¿° LFCS, SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890) SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 12 GNOME 3.10.1 Kernel 3.12.44-52.10-default up 8:47, 3 users, load average: 0.27, 0.25, 0.24 CPU Intel® Core i3-3227U CPU @ 1.90GHz | GPU Intel® HD Graphics 4000 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-09-01 01:42, Malcolm wrote:
Hi Huh? You just add the OBS repo to add files/patterns to your SUSE Studio build target...
But there will not be any repo to add. They won't have any 32 bit version. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXk79gACgkQja8UbcUWM1zDcAD+MEyA+NaKUO6WotdKrgc/wRzg 3VEyvg7BMgqqmjA2C9sA/RLuRvXAOZhPbEkuiEsISvtb+I1tfjGt+QhJWWQxc3Wl =fOZC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue 01 Sep 2015 02:22:49 AM CDT, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-09-01 01:42, Malcolm wrote:
Hi Huh? You just add the OBS repo to add files/patterns to your SUSE Studio build target...
But there will not be any repo to add. They won't have any 32 bit version.
Hi But if you band together and build it there will be.... -- Cheers Malcolm °¿° LFCS, SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890) SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 12 GNOME 3.10.1 Kernel 3.12.44-52.10-default up 9:42, 3 users, load average: 0.38, 0.24, 0.28 CPU Intel® Core i3-3227U CPU @ 1.90GHz | GPU Intel® HD Graphics 4000 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
"Carlos E. R." <robin.listas@telefonica.net> writes:
On 2015-09-01 01:42, Malcolm wrote:
Hi Huh? You just add the OBS repo to add files/patterns to your SUSE Studio build target...
But there will not be any repo to add. They won't have any 32 bit version.
The i586 architecture won't be removed from the repository, since it is still needed to build the -32bit packages. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely different." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On August 31, 2015 7:29:23 PM EDT, "Carlos E. R." <robin.listas@telefonica.net> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-31 17:46, Brian F. Yulga wrote:
I completely understand that it is not practical to continue official 32-bit support due to the general direction of the openSUSE project with Leap. Is there a way to make unofficial 32-bit support (e.g. a spin) less time or effort... for example, require a successful build against the "minimal x-window" install pattern, instead of all packages? (I have no idea because I haven't used OBS - I need to learn!)
I fear it will be impossible. We can not build it on susestudio because there will be nothing to base it on, no repos to draw from. And I don't know if it is possible to do an install disk on the OBS, if the 32 bit target is removed. We would have to do it all. Absolutely all.
Carlos, OB$ builds various "ports" of opensuse: multiple ARM and PPC architectures. One of those is built via qemu on the Intel servers. If 32-bit is demoted to ports status, I fully expect it to stay on OBS, just with a lower build priority than it has now. That is unlikely to be the problem. Further, OBS has integrated kiwi support, so building ISOs should still be possible. The bigger issue is who are the enthusiasts that will maintain grub, grub2, lilo, initrd, and of course the kernel. There are arm enthusiasts that make sure it works on various arm platforms. Maybe they can inform us how much work it is? As I've said, i don't need an up to date 32-bit version of openSUSE, so I won't be one of those enthusiasts. Greg -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-09-01 02:56, greg.freemyer@ wrote:
Carlos,
OB$ builds various "ports" of opensuse: multiple ARM and PPC architectures. One of those is built via qemu on the Intel servers.
If 32-bit is demoted to ports status, I fully expect it to stay on OBS, just with a lower build priority than it has now. That is unlikely to be the problem. Further, OBS has integrated kiwi support, so building ISOs should still be possible.
I see.
The bigger issue is who are the enthusiasts that will maintain grub, grub2, lilo, initrd, and of course the kernel.
True.
There are arm enthusiasts that make sure it works on various arm platforms. Maybe they can inform us how much work it is? As I've said, i don't need an up to date 32-bit version of openSUSE, so I won't be one of those enthusiasts.
I might be, but I don't have the knowledge at all. I'm a developer by training, yes, but not in Linux. And certainly nothing about OBS, and some of what I thought I knew was/is wrong. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXlZKkACgkQja8UbcUWM1yeOAD9FFO8yIeWZmjZXGqObURbjbyl TYhCvs1Gs6ul49uU63EA/34c9udy8WMOHS/0SBViJTLfkSLn81de/X3AaoUmTnPS =9LAL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
greg.freemyer@gmail.com composed on 2015-08-31 20:56 (UTC-0400):
The bigger issue is who are the enthusiasts that will maintain grub, grub2, lilo, initrd, and of course the kernel.
Seems to me decade or older 32 bit CPUs ought to get along just fine without any "maintenance" on Grub Legacy, and for most need none of what Grub2 provides that Grub Legacy doesn't. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-09-01 11:04, Felix Miata wrote:
greg.freemyer@ composed on 2015-08-31 20:56 (UTC-0400):
The bigger issue is who are the enthusiasts that will maintain grub, grub2, lilo, initrd, and of course the kernel.
Seems to me decade or older 32 bit CPUs ought to get along just fine without any "maintenance" on Grub Legacy, and for most need none of what Grub2 provides that Grub Legacy doesn't.
Well, yes, unnecessary things would have to be dropped, and keep only the easiest to maintain. UEFI: no. There should not be UEFI/32 bit machines. lilo, grub 1: no. Grub2 is easier to maintain (not as user, but as maintainer). initrd? Keep dracut, I guess. Based in 13.2/tumbleweed. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXlcOkACgkQja8UbcUWM1yuyAD/X4WyAml0b5Jh1wAyBDnNRMO7 ZXrtWRVrIpQ6AiKMzuMA/ROmn/WJEW9q3IQJ11MyntyRehZUNv2I/vDSUL8+C7oo =eNTg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 11:33, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-09-01 11:04, Felix Miata wrote:
greg.freemyer@ composed on 2015-08-31 20:56 (UTC-0400):
The bigger issue is who are the enthusiasts that will maintain grub, grub2, lilo, initrd, and of course the kernel.
Seems to me decade or older 32 bit CPUs ought to get along just fine without any "maintenance" on Grub Legacy, and for most need none of what Grub2 provides that Grub Legacy doesn't.
Well, yes, unnecessary things would have to be dropped, and keep only the easiest to maintain.
UEFI: no. There should not be UEFI/32 bit machines.
Apple laughts at you. They started using EFI on 32bit CPUs. They have even the ugly construct of 32bit EFI on 64bit CPU boards.
lilo, grub 1: no. Grub2 is easier to maintain (not as user, but as maintainer).
Did lilo (and syslinux) need any maintainance in the last 3 years? Can't remember that, I'd keep the packages, (mostly for the ones that HATE grub and grub2, to keep them silent, they know what they do by hand, no Yast2 support since 13.1 or even 12.3). But grub1, that is a beast. Is there a fully working tool (cli, maybe even yast2 readonly) that takes a grub1-config and build a valid (as in: yast2 and grub2 works with it) grub2-config? If yes, I'd vote for dropping grub1 and trusted-grub1 like a rotted egg.
initrd? Keep dracut, I guess. Based in 13.2/tumbleweed.
Today dracut is mature enough for the most common cases, and for the cases where dracut does not work, even initrd has troubles. - Yamaban. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-09-01 12:58, Yamaban wrote:
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 11:33, Carlos E. R. wrote:
UEFI: no. There should not be UEFI/32 bit machines.
Apple laughts at you. They started using EFI on 32bit CPUs. They have even the ugly construct of 32bit EFI on 64bit CPU boards.
Crumbs. :-} Consider that things have to be ported from the existing Leap. Anything not maintained there can't be used on 32 bits either, even less by people not experienced in making a distro... - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXlljEACgkQja8UbcUWM1wGWAEAh4XZFOMMJ6naYLvthYn6nzb8 dSVMOANQw3KMRysHaEcA/Ri1x2aLefO+fGXj6HPTqycze/JjR9CKXQoRuYXJIkN+ =OUzt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Yamaban composed on 2015-09-01 12:58 (UTC+0200):
But grub1, that is a beast.
How so? I committed http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/legacy/grub.html#Installing-GRUB-nat... to memory many years ago. It and a mcedit are all I need to make and keep an installation bootable - no need for any scripts, no need for chrooting or man pages to explain how to get any Grub2 script to do what is so simple to do with the Grub Legacy shell. KISS at its finest, easy to fix in those rare cases where it gets broken by some renegade installer or script. Whenever I install Fedora or openSUSE post-13.1, I choose install no bootloader at installation time. Then I install openSUSE 13.1's Grub Legacy in Fedoras, and zypper in grub in openSUSE. Multiboot life is blissful, without any of the Grub2 trouble I read about in forums and mailing lists.
Is there a fully working tool (cli, maybe even yast2 readonly) that takes a grub1-config and build a valid (as in: yast2 and grub2 works with it) grub2-config?
If yes, I'd vote for dropping grub1 and trusted-grub1 like a rotted egg.
How can Grub Legacy be hard to "maintain"? V2.03 now in TW repos had only had 5 patches post-13.1, possibly[1] all of which appear to this non-programmer to be build config/build dep related. [1] whether this was a build config/dep issue or not I cannot tell: https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=918028 -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 01 Sep 2015 12:58:48 +0200, Yamaban wrote:
Did lilo (and syslinux) need any maintainance in the last 3 years?
I remember seeing something within the past day or so that lilo development is finished. Ah, yes, here: https://lilo.alioth.debian.org/ Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/01/2015 03:21 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Tue, 01 Sep 2015 12:58:48 +0200, Yamaban wrote:
Did lilo (and syslinux) need any maintainance in the last 3 years?
I remember seeing something within the past day or so that lilo development is finished.
Ah, yes, here:
https://lilo.alioth.debian.org/
Jim
Yes. 2015 is the last year for lilo. Ah..Those were the pre grub1 days of lilo.Very easy to work with. -- Cheers! Roman ICQ: 551368250 ==============
Roman Bysh composed on 2015-09-01 19:23 (UTC-0400):
Yes. 2015 is the last year for lilo. Ah..Those were the pre grub1 days of lilo.Very easy to work with.
Only as long as lilo.conf never had a typo, and lilo always got remembered to be run after an edit to lilo.conf. Grub's on the fly cmdline editing was a welcome difference. I've never looked back. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/01/2015 07:57 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
Roman Bysh composed on 2015-09-01 19:23 (UTC-0400):
Yes. 2015 is the last year for lilo. Ah..Those were the pre grub1 days of lilo.Very easy to work with.
Only as long as lilo.conf never had a typo, and lilo always got remembered to be run after an edit to lilo.conf. Grub's on the fly cmdline editing was a welcome difference. I've never looked back.
Exactly. You also had to run lilo -v for updating. I always liked Grub1 as it was easy to understand. Whereas Grub2 relies on scripts. -- Cheers! Roman ICQ: 551368250 ============== -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Отправлено с iPhone
2 сент. 2015 г., в 4:20, Roman Bysh <rbtc1@rogers.com> написал(а):
On 09/01/2015 07:57 PM, Felix Miata wrote: Roman Bysh composed on 2015-09-01 19:23 (UTC-0400):
Yes. 2015 is the last year for lilo. Ah..Those were the pre grub1 days of lilo.Very easy to work with.
Only as long as lilo.conf never had a typo, and lilo always got remembered to be run after an edit to lilo.conf. Grub's on the fly cmdline editing was a welcome difference. I've never looked back. Exactly. You also had to run lilo -v for updating. I always liked Grub1 as it was easy to understand. Whereas Grub2 relies on scripts.
No, it does not. It offers "easy configuration" tool grub-mkconfig for those who do not want to write own grub.cfg. But this is entirely optional. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Отправлено с iPhone
1 сент. 2015 г., в 13:58, Yamaban <foerster@lisas.de> написал(а):
But grub1, that is a beast. Is there a fully working tool (cli, maybe even yast2 readonly) that takes a grub1-config and build a valid (as in: yast2 and grub2 works with it) grub2-config?
Grub2 can directly read legacy grub menu.lst. This is not integrated in grub-mkconfig, you will need to maintain grub.cfg manually.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Monday 31 of August 2015 10:46:30 Brian F. Yulga wrote:
Agreed, writing as a long-time user that does not need latest and greatest all the time! My ASUS Eee PC Tablet -- purchased new in 2011 -- is 32-bit only. But, it has (after upgrades) an SSD and 2 GB of RAM, and ran most openSUSE releases since 11.4. A four year-old netbook that I use regularly doesn't feel that old or obsolete to me, especially when running Linux.
What model are you talking about? I tried Google and found "ASUS EEE Pad Transformer TF101" which has NVidia Tegra 3 CPU, i.e. ARM. That wouldn't be relevant for the discussion about i586 architecture. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015.08.31 23:56, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Monday 31 of August 2015 10:46:30 Brian F. Yulga wrote:
Agreed, writing as a long-time user that does not need latest and greatest all the time! My ASUS Eee PC Tablet -- purchased new in 2011 -- is 32-bit only. But, it has (after upgrades) an SSD and 2 GB of RAM, and ran most openSUSE releases since 11.4. A four year-old netbook that I use regularly doesn't feel that old or obsolete to me, especially when running Linux. What model are you talking about? I tried Google and found "ASUS EEE Pad Transformer TF101" which has NVidia Tegra 3 CPU, i.e. ARM. That wouldn't be relevant for the discussion about i586 architecture.
Michal Kubeček
This one has an Intel Atom CPU, and came with Win 7 Starter 32-bit (which I never used :-) Model number under the battery: T101MT-EU27-BK http://www.asus.com/Notebooks/Eee_PC_T101MT/specifications/ -- Brian Y. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue 01 Sep 2015 08:27:38 AM CDT, Brian F. Yulga wrote:
On 2015.08.31 23:56, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Monday 31 of August 2015 10:46:30 Brian F. Yulga wrote:
Agreed, writing as a long-time user that does not need latest and greatest all the time! My ASUS Eee PC Tablet -- purchased new in 2011 -- is 32-bit only. But, it has (after upgrades) an SSD and 2 GB of RAM, and ran most openSUSE releases since 11.4. A four year-old netbook that I use regularly doesn't feel that old or obsolete to me, especially when running Linux. What model are you talking about? I tried Google and found "ASUS EEE Pad Transformer TF101" which has NVidia Tegra 3 CPU, i.e. ARM. That wouldn't be relevant for the discussion about i586 architecture.
Michal Kubeček
This one has an Intel Atom CPU, and came with Win 7 Starter 32-bit (which I never used :-) Model number under the battery: T101MT-EU27-BK
http://www.asus.com/Notebooks/Eee_PC_T101MT/specifications/
-- Brian Y.
Hi And both of those cpu's are 64bit.... http://ark.intel.com/products/42503/Intel-Atom-Processor-N450-512K-Cache-1_6... http://ark.intel.com/products/55637/Intel-Atom-Processor-N570-1M-Cache-1_66-... You also realize that a valid windows product code works with 32 and 64bit, so you could have installed the 64bit starter if so inclined. -- Cheers Malcolm °¿° LFCS, SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890) SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 12 GNOME 3.10.1 Kernel 3.12.44-52.10-default up 23:09, 4 users, load average: 0.71, 0.60, 0.49 CPU Intel® Core i3-3227U CPU @ 1.90GHz | GPU Intel® HD Graphics 4000 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/01/2015 11:00 AM, Brian F. Yulga wrote: ????? -- Ken Schneider -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/01/2015 11:30 AM, Ken Schneider - Factory wrote:
On 09/01/2015 11:00 AM, Brian F. Yulga wrote:
?????
!!!!! ;-) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015.09.01 09:02, Malcolm wrote:
On Tue 01 Sep 2015 08:27:38 AM CDT, Brian F. Yulga wrote:
On 2015.08.31 23:56, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Monday 31 of August 2015 10:46:30 Brian F. Yulga wrote:
Agreed, writing as a long-time user that does not need latest and greatest all the time! My ASUS Eee PC Tablet -- purchased new in 2011 -- is 32-bit only. But, it has (after upgrades) an SSD and 2 GB of RAM, and ran most openSUSE releases since 11.4. A four year-old netbook that I use regularly doesn't feel that old or obsolete to me, especially when running Linux. What model are you talking about? I tried Google and found "ASUS EEE Pad Transformer TF101" which has NVidia Tegra 3 CPU, i.e. ARM. That wouldn't be relevant for the discussion about i586 architecture.
Michal Kubeček
This one has an Intel Atom CPU, and came with Win 7 Starter 32-bit (which I never used :-) Model number under the battery: T101MT-EU27-BK
http://www.asus.com/Notebooks/Eee_PC_T101MT/specifications/
-- Brian Y.
Hi And both of those cpu's are 64bit.... http://ark.intel.com/products/42503/Intel-Atom-Processor-N450-512K-Cache-1_6... http://ark.intel.com/products/55637/Intel-Atom-Processor-N570-1M-Cache-1_66-...
You also realize that a valid windows product code works with 32 and 64bit, so you could have installed the 64bit starter if so inclined.
Wow, you are absolutely right! The 64-bit capability was not well-advertised, and I did not know it was possible to use a 64-bit Win 7 when it came with 32-bit. My apologies. My other Eee PC from ~2009 is definitely 32-bit... https://www.asus.com/Notebooks/Eee_PC_S101/specifications/ http://ark.intel.com/products/36331/Intel-Atom-Processor-N270-512K-Cache-1_6... ...and using IceWM for primarily xterm and ssh. It's the first time I tried the "Minimal X Window" install with openSUSE, and have been pleased with the results. -- Brian Y. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Le lundi 31 août 2015 à 10:46 -0500, Brian F. Yulga a écrit :
On 2015.08.28 21:12, Felix Miata wrote:
Carlos E. R. composed on 2015-08-29 02:09 (UTC+0200):
So its about 12% for 13.1 and 5% for 13.2 Not sure what it really tells us, but there are people reporting bugs against 32-bit. Maybe it means 32 bit users aren't interested in latest and greatest
On 2015-08-28 22:44 (UTC-0400), Greg Freemyer wrote: things generally, and/or more interested in not needing to upgrade to a newer distro version when support terminates for their installed release. After all, 13.1 has scheduled to become Evergreen for quite some time.
Agreed, writing as a long-time user that does not need latest and greatest all the time! My ASUS Eee PC Tablet -- purchased new in 2011 -- is 32-bit only. But, it has (after upgrades) an SSD and 2 GB of RAM, and ran most openSUSE releases since 11.4. A four year-old netbook that I use regularly doesn't feel that old or obsolete to me, especially when running Linux.
Well, I have a counter example, as a "low cost" netbook bought in 2010 (ie 5 years old) (emachine m350) has a 64bit capable Atom CPU.. -- Frederic Crozat Enterprise Desktop Release Manager SUSE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am 28.08.2015 um 20:59 schrieb Greg Freemyer:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Martin Pluskal <martin@pluskal.org> wrote:
+1 Simple bugzilla search shows that this year, following numbers of issues were reported for Tumbleweed (and had architecture specified) x86_64: 233 i386, i586, i686: 6
Shocking! Bleeding Edge Tumbleweed users aren't using 32-bit. I'm amazed.
Seriously, give the 13.1 and 13.2 number over their lifetimes.
(I'd do it, but I don't know how to run those searches in bugzilla.)
I'm also curious what the breakdown is at SUSESTUDIO. I only publish one appliance there, but it is 32-bit to ensure the widest hardware compatibility, and yes that includes 10+ year old machines.
Greg -- Greg Freemyer www.IntelligentAvatar.net
Damn, I could have raised the i*86 number by 16%, if I had not forgotten to set the hardware in my last bug report :) My personal interest is running old hardware. I could afford to by new hardware, but I _hate_ to throw away a good working laptop with an excellent display just because it is "old" by someone's standards. So I raised my hand, to tell that I'd love to see 32-bit versions of openSUSE in the future. If it makes a difference, fine. If not, the world will keep on turning. Hendrik -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hendrik Woltersdorf wrote:
My personal interest is running old hardware. I could afford to by new hardware, but I _hate_ to throw away a good working laptop with an excellent display just because it is "old" by someone's standards.
So I raised my hand, to tell that I'd love to see 32-bit versions of openSUSE in the future. If it makes a difference, fine. If not, the world will keep on turning.
Personally speaking, I think you're the kind of user we want to keep hanging on. The amateurs who love what they're doing. (look up what amateur means if you don't know). I also love to fire up an ancient box just to see if the latest openSUSE will install and/or work. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.4°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday, August 28, 2015 10:27:34 PM Per Jessen wrote:
Hendrik Woltersdorf wrote:
My personal interest is running old hardware. I could afford to by new hardware, but I _hate_ to throw away a good working laptop with an excellent display just because it is "old" by someone's standards.
So I raised my hand, to tell that I'd love to see 32-bit versions of openSUSE in the future. If it makes a difference, fine. If not, the world will keep on turning.
Personally speaking, I think you're the kind of user we want to keep hanging on. The amateurs who love what they're doing. (look up what amateur means if you don't know).
I also love to fire up an ancient box just to see if the latest openSUSE will install and/or work.
Well, I will hate to throw away a bunch of "old" and excellent pieces of hardware just because useful OS Standards changed. I will cry loud with no remedies to keep those modular and good machines "before spy era" ;-D At the end, will say "Farewell my beloved ones, we had a good time together. Now it's time to switch for the sake of new hardware generation" :-) Regards, Rick -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Martin Pluskal composed on 2015-08-28 18:59 (UTC+0200):
Simple bugzilla search shows that this year, following numbers of issues were reported for Tumbleweed (and had architecture specified) x86_64: 233 i386, i586, i686: 6
Note that although number of repors for TW is much larger (878), architecture is not specified in most cases, but ratio suggests that amount of 32-bit systems is bellow 3%.
Note that filing a bug does not require that the machine the bug was found on be used to file a bug. Often that is impossible, and somebody else's PC, often running Windows if my Apache logs are any guide, is used, which means Bugzilla won't automatically prefill arch correctly, if at all, when a report is filled out. I specified either PC, i586, 32 bit, or x86 on 6 of the 23 BOO bugs I filed in the past 365 days. Those 6 are either 32 bit exclusive or 32 bit inclusive. Likely half the rest, not counting opensuse.org infrastructure bugs, would have been discovered here on a 32 bit boot, possibly confirmed on a 64 bit boot. 13 of the 23 are currently on product Factory. More would have been filed had I not made the effort to determine what I found was upstream sourced and filed there instead. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 05:17, Felix Miata wrote:
I specified either PC, i586, 32 bit, or x86 on 6 of the 23 BOO bugs I filed in the past 365 days. Those 6 are either 32 bit exclusive or 32 bit inclusive. Likely half the rest, not counting opensuse.org infrastructure bugs, would have been discovered here on a 32 bit boot, possibly confirmed on a 64 bit boot. 13 of the 23 are currently on product Factory. More would have been filed had I not made the effort to determine what I found was upstream sourced and filed there instead.
Well, it is true. When one has a mixture of 32 and 64 bit machines, and one finds a bug that is present in several, then one doesn't need to specify that the bug is 32 bit specific. The amount of bugzillas entered with "32bit" marked in the field is thus not a real indicator of how many 32 bit machines our userbase has. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF0EAREIAAYFAlXhrCoACgkQja8UbcUWM1wiggEAm/KeLc/OBtLZQvojchclV7Kn wkk3zaBCi2lopw9Q5y0A9RTSZAQnloOYckwhQIcuT6JvT8s7iwLGYJzgeOIHs1Q= =7IEF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 18:23:43 +0200, Ondřej Súkup wrote:
Not really, because it's not openSUSE-specific.
The actual download numbers for 32-bit openSUSE would be better guidance.
no , is same across whole world
If openSUSE users aren't downloading 32-bit in sufficient volume, that's the more useful measurement.
Personally, I don't care how many people around the world use 32-bit systems. I care about the number of people who use openSUSE who use 32- bit systems, and that number, according to Richard, has been shrinking, even though 13.x provides a 32-bit version.
The decline - and rate of decline - is the important measure. Supporting a 32-bit platform until nobody is using 32-bit platforms around the world is a demonstrably silly idea.
That said, though, if there's a group of users who want to continue to build a 32-bit version, that's cool. Let it be like the Pi versions, or the other non-official builds like Evergreen or the education version. That's what open source is all about.
Where do I/we start? It seems to be slightly different to both Evergreen and the education version as they are based on existing versions. (to my knowledge).
I got rid of my last 32-bit system many years ago. When I was laid off, I had to scrape together enough money to buy a laptop, and I bought a 64-bit system for a pretty good price. I wouldn't say I was in poverty, but I certainly had to watch every penny I spent.
Apologies, I may be stepping on somebodys toes, but it's really not so much about running on real 32-bit hardware. The 32-bit-only hardware _is_ dying, but it doesn't mean the software has to die too. For the purpose of this discussion, perhaps we ought to focus on running 32-bit systems on 64-bit hardware. (that's my current focus any way). -- Per Jessen, Zürich (24.6°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 20:38:12 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
That said, though, if there's a group of users who want to continue to build a 32-bit version, that's cool. Let it be like the Pi versions, or the other non-official builds like Evergreen or the education version. That's what open source is all about.
Where do I/we start? It seems to be slightly different to both Evergreen and the education version as they are based on existing versions. (to my knowledge).
If it were me, I'd start by learning how to build the packages and build a release. That seems like a logical first step.
I got rid of my last 32-bit system many years ago. When I was laid off, I had to scrape together enough money to buy a laptop, and I bought a 64-bit system for a pretty good price. I wouldn't say I was in poverty, but I certainly had to watch every penny I spent.
Apologies, I may be stepping on somebodys toes, but it's really not so much about running on real 32-bit hardware. The 32-bit-only hardware _is_ dying, but it doesn't mean the software has to die too. For the purpose of this discussion, perhaps we ought to focus on running 32-bit systems on 64-bit hardware. (that's my current focus any way).
To what end? Why would you install a 32-bit OS on 64-bit hardware? If it's to deal with some deficiency in the 64-bit version, fix the deficiency rather than maintain an entire infrastructure to build a 32- bit release. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 20:38:12 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
That said, though, if there's a group of users who want to continue to build a 32-bit version, that's cool. Let it be like the Pi versions, or the other non-official builds like Evergreen or the education version. That's what open source is all about.
Where do I/we start? It seems to be slightly different to both Evergreen and the education version as they are based on existing versions. (to my knowledge).
If it were me, I'd start by learning how to build the packages and build a release. That seems like a logical first step.
I agree, sounds good. I tried joining the release engineering team back in June, but my attempts were so far ignored. Is there documentation available anywhere? I know how to build packages, now how about an entire release?
I got rid of my last 32-bit system many years ago. When I was laid off, I had to scrape together enough money to buy a laptop, and I bought a 64-bit system for a pretty good price. I wouldn't say I was in poverty, but I certainly had to watch every penny I spent.
Apologies, I may be stepping on somebodys toes, but it's really not so much about running on real 32-bit hardware. The 32-bit-only hardware _is_ dying, but it doesn't mean the software has to die too. For the purpose of this discussion, perhaps we ought to focus on running 32-bit systems on 64-bit hardware. (that's my current focus any way).
To what end? Why would you install a 32-bit OS on 64-bit hardware?
Jim, people (and myself) have pointed that out earlier in this thread: running 32bit apps running 32bit virtual guests. Both use less memory in 32bit.
If it's to deal with some deficiency in the 64-bit version, fix the deficiency rather than maintain an entire infrastructure to build a 32- bit release.
The deficiency is that a 64bit app uses more memory than a 32bit ditto. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.5°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:23:07 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 20:38:12 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
That said, though, if there's a group of users who want to continue to build a 32-bit version, that's cool. Let it be like the Pi versions, or the other non-official builds like Evergreen or the education version. That's what open source is all about.
Where do I/we start? It seems to be slightly different to both Evergreen and the education version as they are based on existing versions. (to my knowledge).
If it were me, I'd start by learning how to build the packages and build a release. That seems like a logical first step.
I agree, sounds good. I tried joining the release engineering team back in June, but my attempts were so far ignored. Is there documentation available anywhere? I know how to build packages, now how about an entire release?
Richard? Can you hook Per up?
I got rid of my last 32-bit system many years ago. When I was laid off, I had to scrape together enough money to buy a laptop, and I bought a 64-bit system for a pretty good price. I wouldn't say I was in poverty, but I certainly had to watch every penny I spent.
Apologies, I may be stepping on somebodys toes, but it's really not so much about running on real 32-bit hardware. The 32-bit-only hardware _is_ dying, but it doesn't mean the software has to die too. For the purpose of this discussion, perhaps we ought to focus on running 32-bit systems on 64-bit hardware. (that's my current focus any way).
To what end? Why would you install a 32-bit OS on 64-bit hardware?
Jim, people (and myself) have pointed that out earlier in this thread:
running 32bit apps running 32bit virtual guests.
Both use less memory in 32bit.
Ah, "scarcity". Not a really good argument IMHO. I've got one system here with 8 GB of RAM, one with 16 GB of RAM, and one with 32 GB of RAM. I run 64-bit SLE in VMs on the latter, typically about 8 at a time.
If it's to deal with some deficiency in the 64-bit version, fix the deficiency rather than maintain an entire infrastructure to build a 32- bit release.
The deficiency is that a 64bit app uses more memory than a 32bit ditto.
How much? 2x? 1.5x? 16 bytes more because of double-byte pointers? It can't be *that* significant, certainly not significant enough to justify the resources to build *an entire 32-bit distribution* to deal with a handful of people who still treat memory is a scarce resource. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 00:39, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:23:07 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
The deficiency is that a 64bit app uses more memory than a 32bit ditto.
How much? 2x? 1.5x? 16 bytes more because of double-byte pointers?
I remember a similar discussion long ago. We did some testing with sample programs, and some would use double memory when compiled for 64 bit than when compiled for 32 bit, and not using pointers at all. Of course, it is a problem with the program design. You can declare some type of integer array, which /may/ compile with different integer sizes (16, 32, 64 bits...) depending on the architecture. Simply because the default for the used declaration is "biggest word available" (which was not a problem when "biggest" meant "32 bit"). Of course, you can declare a different type of integer and this is not a problem anymore. Ok, but this was with "sample test programs", it can be said. True. But that thread originated because the OP had found a particular application (sorry, I don't remember which) which used huge amounts of memory, and in 64 bits it doubled the already huge amount. Mind, I'm not saying that "any 64 bit install uses double the memory than a 32 bit install". No. I say that "it can" use up to that. What is the figure currently, I don't know. I haven't tested. I was told, I think, but I forgot. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXg/EQACgkQja8UbcUWM1ysnwEAmohJ4RFc4JPQWtKBtvIL/TuW bU+l1a2xkUDuYG20m/QA+wVORdy26vr89sga1dVQs0v+5IeAjv8GHLdAy7SNNx3N =dI+A -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, 2015-08-29 at 02:26 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-08-29 00:39, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:23:07 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
The deficiency is that a 64bit app uses more memory than a 32bit ditto.
How much? 2x? 1.5x? 16 bytes more because of double-byte pointers?
I remember a similar discussion long ago. We did some testing with sample programs, and some would use double memory when compiled for 64 bit than when compiled for 32 bit, and not using pointers at all.
Of course, it is a problem with the program design. You can declare some type of integer array, which /may/ compile with different integer sizes (16, 32, 64 bits...) depending on the architecture. Simply because the default for the used declaration is "biggest word available" (which was not a problem when "biggest" meant "32 bit").
Of course, you can declare a different type of integer and this is not a problem anymore.
Ok, but this was with "sample test programs", it can be said. True. But that thread originated because the OP had found a particular application (sorry, I don't remember which) which used huge amounts of memory, and in 64 bits it doubled the already huge amount.
Mind, I'm not saying that "any 64 bit install uses double the memory than a 32 bit install". No. I say that "it can" use up to that. What is the figure currently, I don't know. I haven't tested. I was told, I think, but I forgot.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
s/32/16/g s/386/286/g Woah. It's 1987 all over again. :P -- James Mason Technical Architect, Public Cloud openSUSE Member SUSE jmason@suse.com ------------------------------------- SUSECon 2015: Register at susecon.com
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 9:26 PM, Carlos E. R. <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> wrote:
Ok, but this was with "sample test programs", it can be said. True. But that thread originated because the OP had found a particular application (sorry, I don't remember which) which used huge amounts of memory, and in 64 bits it doubled the already huge amount.
Sample programs. or even single real-life programs are meaningless in this context (unless there is a memory leak or a design issue).. what matters is whole-system performance/memory usage and the tradeoffs involved.. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 08:17, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 9:26 PM, Carlos E. R. <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> wrote:
Ok, but this was with "sample test programs", it can be said. True. But that thread originated because the OP had found a particular application (sorry, I don't remember which) which used huge amounts of memory, and in 64 bits it doubled the already huge amount.
Sample programs. or even single real-life programs are meaningless in this context (unless there is a memory leak or a design issue).. what matters is whole-system performance/memory usage and the tradeoffs involved..
Well, when I have time, I can do identical 32 and 64 bit installs, under vmware, and compare memory usage with identical loads. What I have said here is that I know that there are applications that use double. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXhrNYACgkQja8UbcUWM1zNVwEAkk1IfRNEvegGkD/rsJxfVkXk OIIy9DWasd86ZiOL7BsA/RxN3sD95CEF2Fn54dQKTcO/HfsMENdl5wZki+UUzO7k =EYH6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Carlos E. R. <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> wrote:
Well, when I have time, I can do identical 32 and 64 bit installs, under vmware,
Don't..at least not under vmware..thing we do not know what is doing and can't fix.. use KVM instead.
and compare memory usage with identical loads.
Compare the proportional set size (PSS) of the relevant processes. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 20:03, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Carlos E. R. <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> wrote:
Well, when I have time, I can do identical 32 and 64 bit installs, under vmware,
Don't..at least not under vmware..thing we do not know what is doing and can't fix.. use KVM instead.
Sorry, no. I don't know nor use KVM :-) - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXh/sgACgkQja8UbcUWM1wXhwD/b6mCYk+YYd0jqBO+7CW9MpqC YX9Lbu75rjBnoxDitX4A/3CoEa+Z28C0tDlDhh31D2fubT//UOjrGfEJmlwPG0K6 =H9mW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 02:26:44 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Ok, but this was with "sample test programs", it can be said. True. But that thread originated because the OP had found a particular application (sorry, I don't remember which) which used huge amounts of memory, and in 64 bits it doubled the already huge amount.
Just because you can find an edge case where this is true doesn't mean it's nominally true. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jim Henderson composed on 2015-08-28 22:39 (UTC):
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:23:07 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim, people (and myself) have pointed that out earlier in this thread:
running 32bit apps running 32bit virtual guests.
Both use less memory in 32bit.
Ah, "scarcity". Not a really good argument IMHO.
It isn't only the blessed who need to use a computer. Scarcity comes in many forms. Among them are people lucky to get a working free or dirt cheap machine from whatever source with whatever RAM and HD it came with. Adding RAM isn't necessarily cheap, if doable at all. For older machines that can actually accept more than they already have, compatible RAM has to be both in budget, discoverable, and available to its owner. Another scarcity comes in the form of working 32 bit motherboards with 1G (or less, such as 3 DIMM VIA boards limted to 256M per stick) maximum supported RAM, including some that run at about 70% of maximum speed when all three slots are filled to capacity. I run openSUSE on IIRC three such, mainly in order to find and file bugs that don't hit developer-class hardware, all with Athlon (32 bit) CPUs. Slighty newer ones support 2G maximum RAM. I have several such, all with 32 bit P4s, kept alive and functioning for the same reason as the Athlons, and not all populated with 2G. The motherboard used to type this with 13.1, about 7 years old, has only 2 DDR2 slots, and supports no larger than 2G modules. It uses RAID1, is bootable from floppy, and runs 32 bit 13.1 on a 2009 Wolfdale. 32 bit 13.1 in part is because my backup strategy includes multiboot, the prior release remaining instantly ready to chroot *when* necessary, as when the prior motherboard expired without warning and what was readily available had to be pressed into duty quickly. This upgrade cycle has been in place since early openSUSE years, before 64 bit had become the arch of choice for mere mortals, and consequently is 32 bit dependent in a manner, on a 32 bit predecessor. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:55:28 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
Jim Henderson composed on 2015-08-28 22:39 (UTC):
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:23:07 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim, people (and myself) have pointed that out earlier in this thread:
running 32bit apps running 32bit virtual guests.
Both use less memory in 32bit.
Ah, "scarcity". Not a really good argument IMHO.
It isn't only the blessed who need to use a computer. Scarcity comes in many forms. Among them are people lucky to get a working free or dirt cheap machine from whatever source with whatever RAM and HD it came with. Adding RAM isn't necessarily cheap, if doable at all. For older machines that can actually accept more than they already have, compatible RAM has to be both in budget, discoverable, and available to its owner.
Another scarcity comes in the form of working 32 bit motherboards with 1G (or less, such as 3 DIMM VIA boards limted to 256M per stick) maximum supported RAM, including some that run at about 70% of maximum speed when all three slots are filled to capacity. I run openSUSE on IIRC three such, mainly in order to find and file bugs that don't hit developer-class hardware, all with Athlon (32 bit) CPUs. Slighty newer ones support 2G maximum RAM. I have several such, all with 32 bit P4s, kept alive and functioning for the same reason as the Athlons, and not all populated with 2G.
The motherboard used to type this with 13.1, about 7 years old, has only 2 DDR2 slots, and supports no larger than 2G modules. It uses RAID1, is bootable from floppy, and runs 32 bit 13.1 on a 2009 Wolfdale. 32 bit 13.1 in part is because my backup strategy includes multiboot, the prior release remaining instantly ready to chroot *when* necessary, as when the prior motherboard expired without warning and what was readily available had to be pressed into duty quickly. This upgrade cycle has been in place since early openSUSE years, before 64 bit had become the arch of choice for mere mortals, and consequently is 32 bit dependent in a manner, on a 32 bit predecessor. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
Designing to an obsolete lowest common denominator is a great way to hold things back and stifle progress. Sorry, but I just don't see the need for an official Leap 42.1 build. Someone wants to do an unofficial one, that's what open source is about. You're right, it isn't only the blessed who need to use a computer - but at some point, you have to say that there is a minimum entry requirement for an *official* build, because people's time is involved. That's the scarcity measure that matters in developing a release. As I said, you want an unofficial 32-bit build of Leap 42.1, knock yourself out. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:23:07 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 20:38:12 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
That said, though, if there's a group of users who want to continue to build a 32-bit version, that's cool. Let it be like the Pi versions, or the other non-official builds like Evergreen or the education version. That's what open source is all about.
Where do I/we start? It seems to be slightly different to both Evergreen and the education version as they are based on existing versions. (to my knowledge).
If it were me, I'd start by learning how to build the packages and build a release. That seems like a logical first step.
I agree, sounds good. I tried joining the release engineering team back in June, but my attempts were so far ignored. Is there documentation available anywhere? I know how to build packages, now how about an entire release?
Richard? Can you hook Per up?
FYI, nothing has happened so far.
I got rid of my last 32-bit system many years ago. When I was laid off, I had to scrape together enough money to buy a laptop, and I bought a 64-bit system for a pretty good price. I wouldn't say I was in poverty, but I certainly had to watch every penny I spent.
Apologies, I may be stepping on somebodys toes, but it's really not so much about running on real 32-bit hardware. The 32-bit-only hardware _is_ dying, but it doesn't mean the software has to die too. For the purpose of this discussion, perhaps we ought to focus on running 32-bit systems on 64-bit hardware. (that's my current focus any way).
To what end? Why would you install a 32-bit OS on 64-bit hardware?
Jim, people (and myself) have pointed that out earlier in this thread:
running 32bit apps running 32bit virtual guests.
Both use less memory in 32bit.
Ah, "scarcity". Not a really good argument IMHO. I've got one system here with 8 GB of RAM, one with 16 GB of RAM, and one with 32 GB of RAM. I run 64-bit SLE in VMs on the latter, typically about 8 at a time.
Not about scarcity at all - most of my servers have 24Gb and they run a LOT of postfix instances. A lot more in 32bit than in 64bit mode. (some servers have less and no more space for more memory, but that's hardly a reason to upgrade). -- Per Jessen, Zürich (16.9°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 00:37:10 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Richard? Can you hook Per up?
FYI, nothing has happened so far.
Well, you have Richard's e-mail address. Ping him directly. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 00:37:10 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Richard? Can you hook Per up?
FYI, nothing has happened so far.
Well, you have Richard's e-mail address. Ping him directly.
Jim
Jim, thanks for your effort, but to be honest, in this context I'm too old and too weary to be bothered. I have offered to help often enough. When the openSUSE project cannot figure out how to accept it or do with it, it's what you in German would call an Armutszeugnis. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (15.1°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 20:12:17 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 00:37:10 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Richard? Can you hook Per up?
FYI, nothing has happened so far.
Well, you have Richard's e-mail address. Ping him directly.
Jim
Jim, thanks for your effort, but to be honest, in this context I'm too old and too weary to be bothered. I have offered to help often enough. When the openSUSE project cannot figure out how to accept it or do with it, it's what you in German would call an Armutszeugnis.
If you can't bother to make the effort, Per, then don't be surprised if nothing happens. You only have yourself to blame for the lack of follow- up. I'm not here to do for you what you can do for yourself. I have better things to do. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 00:37:10 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Ah, "scarcity". Not a really good argument IMHO. I've got one system here with 8 GB of RAM, one with 16 GB of RAM, and one with 32 GB of RAM. I run 64-bit SLE in VMs on the latter, typically about 8 at a time.
Not about scarcity at all - most of my servers have 24Gb and they run a LOT of postfix instances. A lot more in 32bit than in 64bit mode. (some servers have less and no more space for more memory, but that's hardly a reason to upgrade).
You seem to be using a different definition of "scarcity" than me. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 00:37:10 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Ah, "scarcity". Not a really good argument IMHO. I've got one system here with 8 GB of RAM, one with 16 GB of RAM, and one with 32 GB of RAM. I run 64-bit SLE in VMs on the latter, typically about 8 at a time.
Not about scarcity at all - most of my servers have 24Gb and they run a LOT of postfix instances. A lot more in 32bit than in 64bit mode. (some servers have less and no more space for more memory, but that's hardly a reason to upgrade).
You seem to be using a different definition of "scarcity" than me.
Jim
Jim, do feel free to explain your understanding of "scarcity" (your quotes, not mine). -- Per Jessen, Zürich (15.1°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 20:02:31 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 00:37:10 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Ah, "scarcity". Not a really good argument IMHO. I've got one system here with 8 GB of RAM, one with 16 GB of RAM, and one with 32 GB of RAM. I run 64-bit SLE in VMs on the latter, typically about 8 at a time.
Not about scarcity at all - most of my servers have 24Gb and they run a LOT of postfix instances. A lot more in 32bit than in 64bit mode. (some servers have less and no more space for more memory, but that's hardly a reason to upgrade).
You seem to be using a different definition of "scarcity" than me.
Jim
Jim, do feel free to explain your understanding of "scarcity" (your quotes, not mine).
Resource scarcity is not having to do with a small amount of memory overall in the system, but about coding practices that minimize the amount of memory used per process. Now, while I do think that *efficient* programming is a useful and beneficial thing, counting bytes of memory used by individual processes is something that is a concern in systems of yesteryear - systems that ever byte really, seriously counts. Modern systems do not suffer from that kind of scarcity issue. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Saturday 05 of September 2015 00:37:10 Per Jessen wrote:
Not about scarcity at all - most of my servers have 24Gb and they run a LOT of postfix instances. A lot more in 32bit than in 64bit mode. (some servers have less and no more space for more memory, but that's hardly a reason to upgrade).
(Assuming you actually meant 24 GB rather than 24 Gb as using gigabits for memory sizes would be quite unusual. If you really wanted to say "24 Gb" (i.e. 3 GB), please ignore.) When you talked about memory efficiency, I somehow expected you to run systems with up to 4 GB of RAM, 8 GB in the worst case. I never imagined you would want to run a 32-bit kernel with PAE on a 24GB machine. That would be completely insane. You should realize a 32-bit kernel has ~896 MB of low memory and almost all kernel data structures must fit into it. The biggest of them is the mem_map array holding a struct page (56 B on i586) for each page of physical memory. In your case, just this array would take (24 GB / 4 KB) * 56 B = 352321536 B ~ 336 MB of your precious low memory. As a result, all other kernel data structures including process (kernel) stacks, page cache, file buffers, socket buffers etc. must fit into the remaining 560 MB. It would be really interesting to profile your system and see how much CPU time it wastes on remapping memory and flushing pages into and out of the page cache. You should consider migrating to at least a 64-bit kernel even if you insist on 32-bit userspace. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/07/2015 02:08 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
You should realize a 32-bit kernel has ~896 MB of low memory
Low memory??? I thought that term went out with DOS and Windows 3.x. A 32 bit CPU can directly address 4 GB and more with PAE. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, On Sep 7 07:23 James Knott wrote (excerpt):
On 09/07/2015 02:08 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
You should realize a 32-bit kernel has ~896 MB of low memory
Low memory???
I thought that term went out with DOS and Windows 3.x. A 32 bit CPU can directly address 4 GB and more with PAE.
I know nothing at all about kernel memory stuff so that I stupidly hacked 32-bit kernel has ~896 MB of low memory into Google and I got as first hit http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8252785/why-linux-kernel-zone-normal-is-l... I guess that explains it. Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
for remind .. LINUS words about HIGHMEN and why wee need forget 32bit x86 http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/highmem.html On 7 September 2015 at 13:30, Johannes Meixner <jsmeix@suse.de> wrote:
Hello,
On Sep 7 07:23 James Knott wrote (excerpt):
On 09/07/2015 02:08 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
You should realize a 32-bit kernel has ~896 MB of low memory
Low memory???
I thought that term went out with DOS and Windows 3.x. A 32 bit CPU can directly address 4 GB and more with PAE.
I know nothing at all about kernel memory stuff so that I stupidly hacked
32-bit kernel has ~896 MB of low memory
into Google and I got as first hit
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8252785/why-linux-kernel-zone-normal-is-l...
I guess that explains it.
Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg)
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Monday 07 of September 2015 07:23:14 James Knott wrote:
On 09/07/2015 02:08 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
You should realize a 32-bit kernel has ~896 MB of low memory
Low memory???
I thought that term went out with DOS and Windows 3.x. A 32 bit CPU can directly address 4 GB and more with PAE.
You thought wrong... see e.g. http://lwn.net/Articles/75174/ Of course, it means something different than in old DOS. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/07/2015 07:41 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
I thought that term went out with DOS and Windows 3.x. A 32 bit CPU
can directly address 4 GB and more with PAE. You thought wrong... see e.g. http://lwn.net/Articles/75174/ Of course, it means something different than in old DOS.
I remember when the Lotus, Intel & Microsoft (LIM) boards came out, to provide memory mapping beyond what the 8088/8086 could handle. I also worked with Data General Eclipse computers and the memory mapping boards they used. Of course, when the i386 computers appeared, we got to have "fun" with HIMEM.SYS and expanded & extended memory. There were even bank switching memory cards for the S-100 bus computers, such as my IMSAI 8080. Ahhh... Those were the days. ;-) Also, my first experience with virtual memory was with the VAX 11/780. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek wrote:
of the page cache. You should consider migrating to at least a 64-bit kernel even if you insist on 32-bit userspace.
I agree, that is what I'd prefer to do. I did once try building postfix for 32bit on a 64bit installation, but I think I ran into to so many things missing that I postponed that project. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.8°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:23:07PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
To what end? Why would you install a 32-bit OS on 64-bit hardware?
Jim, people (and myself) have pointed that out earlier in this thread:
running 32bit apps running 32bit virtual guests.
Both use less memory in 32bit.
The reminds me the argument that we shouldn't switch to IPv6 because routing tables would need more memory which would make routers more expensive. Memory prices (in e.g. dollars per MB) have dropped by several orders since the argument started to appear back in the 90's but the mantra keeps being repeated until today and will be repeated on and on. It's the same here: my first 64-bit machine built in 2003 or 2004 had 2GB of RAM (perhaps even 1GB, I'm not sure); my strongest machine today (built in the end of 2012) has 32GB - and I might have actually paid less for these 32 GB than for those 2GB back in 2003 (certainly not much more). That's factor of 16 and I hope even you will agree that's much more than the ratio between x86_64 and i586 memory consumption. At one moment, you simply need to bite the bullet and switch. Otherwise, you will keep repeating the "bigger memory consumption" mantra even if, from the long term perspective, it gets more and more ridiculous. The reward of getting rid of all the low/high mem trickery, vmalloc area limited to ~130 MB, limited register and instruction set or inefficient parameter passing (and I surely forgot a lot more) is worth it. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/29/2015 05:51 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
The reminds me the argument that we shouldn't switch to IPv6 because routing tables would need more memory which would make routers more expensive. Memory prices (in e.g. dollars per MB) have dropped by several orders since the argument started to appear back in the 90's but the mantra keeps being repeated until today and will be repeated on and on.
Part of that problem was caused the the mess that is IPv4 routing. When IPv4 addresses were handed out, little or no thought was given to hierarchal addressing, so routing tables are huge. With IPv6, this problem has generally been avoided. So, even though the addresses are longer, the routing tables tend use less memory.
It's the same here: my first 64-bit machine built in 2003 or 2004 had 2GB of RAM (perhaps even 1GB, I'm not sure); my strongest machine today (built in the end of 2012) has 32GB - and I might have actually paid less for these 32 GB than for those 2GB back in 2003 (certainly not much more). That's factor of 16 and I hope even you will agree that's much more than the ratio between x86_64 and i586 memory consumption.
I bought my first 64 bit mom board about 9 years ago.
At one moment, you simply need to bite the bullet and switch. Otherwise, you will keep repeating the "bigger memory consumption" mantra even if, from the long term perspective, it gets more and more ridiculous. The reward of getting rid of all the low/high mem trickery, vmalloc area limited to ~130 MB, limited register and instruction set or inefficient parameter passing (and I surely forgot a lot more) is worth it.
This is often the case where reluctance to change results in hanging on to something that's so obsolete it causes problems. I often hear from people who, rather than switch to IPv6, hacks on top of hacks, to extend IPv4 is the way to go, not understanding that those hacks tend to break things. BTW, I've been running IPv6 for over 5 years. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 29 August 2015 at 11:51, Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:23:07PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
To what end? Why would you install a 32-bit OS on 64-bit hardware?
Jim, people (and myself) have pointed that out earlier in this thread:
running 32bit apps running 32bit virtual guests.
Both use less memory in 32bit.
The reminds me the argument that we shouldn't switch to IPv6 because routing tables would need more memory which would make routers more expensive. Memory prices (in e.g. dollars per MB) have dropped by several orders since the argument started to appear back in the 90's but the mantra keeps being repeated until today and will be repeated on and on.
It's the same here: my first 64-bit machine built in 2003 or 2004 had 2GB of RAM (perhaps even 1GB, I'm not sure); my strongest machine today (built in the end of 2012) has 32GB - and I might have actually paid less for these 32 GB than for those 2GB back in 2003 (certainly not much more). That's factor of 16 and I hope even you will agree that's much more than the ratio between x86_64 and i586 memory consumption.
At one moment, you simply need to bite the bullet and switch. Otherwise, you will keep repeating the "bigger memory consumption" mantra even if, from the long term perspective, it gets more and more ridiculous. The reward of getting rid of all the low/high mem trickery, vmalloc area limited to ~130 MB, limited register and instruction set or inefficient parameter passing (and I surely forgot a lot more) is worth it.
Michal Kubeček
+1 There is also the support lifetime of Leap to consider 32bit intel downloads have been declining for openSUSE from 11.4's release in March 2011 (when 32-bit media represented 55% of all openSUSE downloads) to date By openSUSE 12.3 in March 2013 32-bit downloads had become the minority (40%) and that decline has continued unabated Remember, 13.2 saw openSUSE's download numbers almost double compared to openSUSE 12.3. The proportion of 32-bit downloads have halved in the same period. But we're not just talking about the past, we have to think about the future. Leap 42.x is expected to be supported until at least November 2018 It would be counter-intuitive to dramatically change Leap 42.x's hardware support midway through its 42.x lifespan, so if we start supporting 32-bit for Leap 42.1, I would say the expectation would be that we should support it until the release of 43.0 3 years from now. The decline of 32-bit usage is not going to slow down over the next 3 years. Experience has also shown us that as time goes on, especially after hardware is no longer produced, it becomes harder and harder to keep supporting that old hardware. If we decided to support 32-bit in Leap, we'd be committing to a lot of work, an increasing amount of work, for a long time, for an ever decreasing number of users. That just does not seem sensible - I'm not going to block or work against anyone if they decide they're able and willing to do the work, but I look at the realities of our project, other projects, our users and the industry at large, and I really do not see the compelling argument for flogging the 32-bit dead horse for another 3 years. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 17:04, Richard Brown wrote:
On 29 August 2015 at 11:51, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:23:07PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
To what end? Why would you install a 32-bit OS on 64-bit hardware?
Jim, people (and myself) have pointed that out earlier in this thread:
running 32bit apps running 32bit virtual guests.
Both use less memory in 32bit.
The reminds me the argument that we shouldn't switch to IPv6 because routing tables would need more memory which would make routers more expensive. Memory prices (in e.g. dollars per MB) have dropped by several orders since the argument started to appear back in the 90's but the mantra keeps being repeated until today and will be repeated on and on.
It's the same here: my first 64-bit machine built in 2003 or 2004 had 2GB of RAM (perhaps even 1GB, I'm not sure); my strongest machine today (built in the end of 2012) has 32GB - and I might have actually paid less for these 32 GB than for those 2GB back in 2003 (certainly not much more). That's factor of 16 and I hope even you will agree that's much more than the ratio between x86_64 and i586 memory consumption.
At one moment, you simply need to bite the bullet and switch. Otherwise, you will keep repeating the "bigger memory consumption" mantra even if, from the long term perspective, it gets more and more ridiculous. The reward of getting rid of all the low/high mem trickery, vmalloc area limited to ~130 MB, limited register and instruction set or inefficient parameter passing (and I surely forgot a lot more) is worth it.
Michal Kubeček
+1
There is also the support lifetime of Leap to consider
32bit intel downloads have been declining for openSUSE from 11.4's release in March 2011 (when 32-bit media represented 55% of all openSUSE downloads) to date
By openSUSE 12.3 in March 2013 32-bit downloads had become the minority (40%) and that decline has continued unabated
Remember, 13.2 saw openSUSE's download numbers almost double compared to openSUSE 12.3. The proportion of 32-bit downloads have halved in the same period.
But we're not just talking about the past, we have to think about the future.
Leap 42.x is expected to be supported until at least November 2018
It would be counter-intuitive to dramatically change Leap 42.x's hardware support midway through its 42.x lifespan, so if we start supporting 32-bit for Leap 42.1, I would say the expectation would be that we should support it until the release of 43.0 3 years from now.
The decline of 32-bit usage is not going to slow down over the next 3 years.
Experience has also shown us that as time goes on, especially after hardware is no longer produced, it becomes harder and harder to keep supporting that old hardware.
If we decided to support 32-bit in Leap, we'd be committing to a lot of work, an increasing amount of work, for a long time, for an ever decreasing number of users.
That just does not seem sensible - I'm not going to block or work against anyone if they decide they're able and willing to do the work, but I look at the realities of our project, other projects, our users and the industry at large, and I really do not see the compelling argument for flogging the 32-bit dead horse for another 3 years.
It would make much more sense to offically endorse a continuation of OSS 13.1 as Evergreen 13.1 (32 + 64 bit) for that timeframe. Nothing speaks against a possible actualisation of parts or components but absent manpower. If those that cry wolf on missing 32 bit in Leap 42.x would enage there, much would be won (and less noise here). Talk to Wolfgang Rosenauer about that. - Yamaban.
On August 29, 2015 12:00:07 PM EDT, Yamaban <foerster@lisas.de> wrote:
On 29 August 2015 at 11:51, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:23:07PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
To what end? Why would you install a 32-bit OS on 64-bit hardware?
Jim, people (and myself) have pointed that out earlier in this
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 17:04, Richard Brown wrote: thread:
running 32bit apps running 32bit virtual guests.
Both use less memory in 32bit.
The reminds me the argument that we shouldn't switch to IPv6 because routing tables would need more memory which would make routers more expensive. Memory prices (in e.g. dollars per MB) have dropped by several orders since the argument started to appear back in the 90's but the mantra keeps being repeated until today and will be repeated on and on.
It's the same here: my first 64-bit machine built in 2003 or 2004 had 2GB of RAM (perhaps even 1GB, I'm not sure); my strongest machine today (built in the end of 2012) has 32GB - and I might have actually paid less for these 32 GB than for those 2GB back in 2003 (certainly not much more). That's factor of 16 and I hope even you will agree that's much more than the ratio between x86_64 and i586 memory consumption.
At one moment, you simply need to bite the bullet and switch. Otherwise, you will keep repeating the "bigger memory consumption" mantra even if, from the long term perspective, it gets more and more ridiculous. The reward of getting rid of all the low/high mem trickery, vmalloc area limited to ~130 MB, limited register and instruction set or inefficient parameter passing (and I surely forgot a lot more) is worth it.
Michal Kubeček
+1
There is also the support lifetime of Leap to consider
32bit intel downloads have been declining for openSUSE from 11.4's release in March 2011 (when 32-bit media represented 55% of all openSUSE downloads) to date
By openSUSE 12.3 in March 2013 32-bit downloads had become the minority (40%) and that decline has continued unabated
Remember, 13.2 saw openSUSE's download numbers almost double compared to openSUSE 12.3. The proportion of 32-bit downloads have halved in the same period.
But we're not just talking about the past, we have to think about the future.
Leap 42.x is expected to be supported until at least November 2018
It would be counter-intuitive to dramatically change Leap 42.x's hardware support midway through its 42.x lifespan, so if we start supporting 32-bit for Leap 42.1, I would say the expectation would be that we should support it until the release of 43.0 3 years from now.
The decline of 32-bit usage is not going to slow down over the next 3 years.
Experience has also shown us that as time goes on, especially after hardware is no longer produced, it becomes harder and harder to keep supporting that old hardware.
If we decided to support 32-bit in Leap, we'd be committing to a lot of work, an increasing amount of work, for a long time, for an ever decreasing number of users.
That just does not seem sensible - I'm not going to block or work against anyone if they decide they're able and willing to do the work, but I look at the realities of our project, other projects, our users and the industry at large, and I really do not see the compelling argument for flogging the 32-bit dead horse for another 3 years.
It would make much more sense to offically endorse a continuation of OSS 13.1 as Evergreen 13.1 (32 + 64 bit) for that timeframe.
Nothing speaks against a possible actualisation of parts or components but absent manpower. If those that cry wolf on missing 32 bit in Leap 42.x would enage there, much would be won (and less noise here).
Talk to Wolfgang Rosenauer about that.
- Yamaban.
I suggest that is a major effort too. Currently Evergreen supplier is roughly 3 years total. You're talking 5 years. Those last 2 years will find it harder and harder to backport security patches etc. Wolfgang can speak up, but without programmers stepping up to the plate and volunteering to do that blacklisting, I don't see it. If memory usage is the main concern, I still argue for a 64-bit kernel and 32-bit aerospace. The entire boot system could be 64-bit so uefi, grub2, initrd could all be 64-bit, but then main application stacks could all be 32-bit. (Apache, mysql, postfix, etc). Theoretically the 32-bit distro pattern could be updated to pull those key pieces from 64-bit builds, but leave everything else to pull from the 32-bit builds they already pull from. How hard would it be to do that? If reasonable, then a group of volunteers could opt to support just the 32-bit boot stack in ports. For me, I don't need a 2015 distro to run on 10+ year old hardware so I won't be part of supporting a 32-bit boot stack. I will keep my 13.1 ISOs around so I can boot old hardware from DVD live media. I don't connect those machines to networks when I boot them and I am the only user, so security patches/support is a non-issue for me. Greg -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri 28 Aug 2015 04:21:59 PM CDT, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 18:03:10 +0200, Hendrik Woltersdorf wrote:
This poll is not representative but might give an answer to the question about user numbers:
Not really, because it's not openSUSE-specific.
The actual download numbers for 32-bit openSUSE would be better guidance.
Jim
Hi But even download numbers can be misleading, I only download one image and deploy to multiple machines, likewise for packages.... but it will indicate a trend for sure. I don't use 32bit either for a number of years, my laptops are pawn shop specials and have not paid anymore than US$150, most machines are less that two years old... -- Cheers Malcolm °¿° LFCS, SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890) SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 12 GNOME 3.10.1 Kernel 3.12.44-52.10-default up 1 day 20:46, 5 users, load average: 0.31, 0.30, 0.23 CPU Intel® Core i3-3227U CPU @ 1.90GHz | GPU Intel® HD Graphics 4000 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 12:03:30 -0500, Malcolm wrote:
On Fri 28 Aug 2015 04:21:59 PM CDT, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 18:03:10 +0200, Hendrik Woltersdorf wrote:
This poll is not representative but might give an answer to the question about user numbers:
Not really, because it's not openSUSE-specific.
The actual download numbers for 32-bit openSUSE would be better guidance.
Jim
Hi But even download numbers can be misleading, I only download one image and deploy to multiple machines, likewise for packages.... but it will indicate a trend for sure.
I don't use 32bit either for a number of years, my laptops are pawn shop specials and have not paid anymore than US$150, most machines are less that two years old...
True that it's not a perfect guide, but it's better than a random poll on the internet that a lot of users didn't know about. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Malcolm wrote:
On Fri 28 Aug 2015 04:21:59 PM CDT, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 18:03:10 +0200, Hendrik Woltersdorf wrote:
This poll is not representative but might give an answer to the question about user numbers:
Not really, because it's not openSUSE-specific.
The actual download numbers for 32-bit openSUSE would be better guidance.
Jim
Hi But even download numbers can be misleading, I only download one image and deploy to multiple machines, likewise for packages.... but it will indicate a trend for sure.
I only very rarely download an image, and I cache the repos with squid. I might be doing 10 new xen guests a day, none would show in any stats. Our production systems on 32bit don't change very often, and I've only just beginning of the year migrated the test systems to 13.2. However, I agree the download numbers will show a trend. Not that I think anyone had any doubts. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (28.6°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jim Henderson composed on 2015-08-28 16:21 (UTC):
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 18:03:10 +0200, Hendrik Woltersdorf wrote:
This poll is not representative but might give an answer to the question about user numbers:
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?myaction=SeeVote&issue=20150629#poll
btw. I'm still using 32bit hardware every day.
Not really, because it's not openSUSE-specific.
The actual download numbers for 32-bit openSUSE would be better guidance.
As mentioned elsewhere, isos are often reused. Maybe not mentioned are isos may never have been used. I virtually never download devel versions, and almost as rarely install from even a release iso, burned or otherwise. I learned on SUSE 8.1 to install HTTP, and still that's usually how I do it. I don't install particularly often. Zypper makes upgrading easy, much less painful than installing fresh, and apparently no more dangerous, maybe less so, than upgrading via iso. Could be that's something 32 bit users do more of too, and another reason to choose openSUSE instead of some other distro. Could be the best way to determine 32 bit vs 64 bit usage is via volume going through the update repos. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 05:30, Felix Miata wrote:
Could be the best way to determine 32 bit vs 64 bit usage is via volume going through the update repos.
Maybe, yes. Maybe there is no way to reliably know, but several indicators should be used, not a single one. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXhqKQACgkQja8UbcUWM1yoIQEAg2iaDlB1hBOgPj17ugc1Znuq XSws4S2CcIuac7htTWEA/jfF6vOzoHofVltzEpYaS9nDbIhf+TvWq3nDfsfmYrZy =wFRX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:23:58 +0200, Johannes Meixner wrote:
I don't know if "voting with the feets" is excatly within the project's policies but I assume there exists some kind of voting mechanism in openSUSE to make decisions ;-)
Maybe the phrase doesn't translate - "voting with your feet" means that when something doesn't meet your needs, you go somewhere else to get something that does.
What Per is saying is that if people who want x86 support from openSUSE don't get it, they'll find a distro that does.
Which, if the stats Richard has are accurate, means we might lose, what, a dozen users? ;) (Exaggeration for effect)
A lot of the stuff we include (I prefer "include" over "support") might possibly have even less users. iSCSI anyone? SNMP? Without 42.1/Leap for 32bit, for my professional needs, I would remain with 13.2 for a while, then eventually switch to <somethingelse-32bit> for xen guests. I have a strong sentimental attachment to open/SUSE, but when it has to go, it has to go. It would be nice to run 32bit apps on a 64bit host though. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (29.4°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 19:22:14 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:23:58 +0200, Johannes Meixner wrote:
I don't know if "voting with the feets" is excatly within the project's policies but I assume there exists some kind of voting mechanism in openSUSE to make decisions ;-)
Maybe the phrase doesn't translate - "voting with your feet" means that when something doesn't meet your needs, you go somewhere else to get something that does.
What Per is saying is that if people who want x86 support from openSUSE don't get it, they'll find a distro that does.
Which, if the stats Richard has are accurate, means we might lose, what, a dozen users? ;) (Exaggeration for effect)
A lot of the stuff we include (I prefer "include" over "support") might possibly have even less users. iSCSI anyone? SNMP?
False equivalency. We're not talking about features, we're talking about an entire platform.
Without 42.1/Leap for 32bit, for my professional needs, I would remain with 13.2 for a while, then eventually switch to <somethingelse-32bit> for xen guests. I have a strong sentimental attachment to open/SUSE, but when it has to go, it has to go. It would be nice to run 32bit apps on a 64bit host though.
I don't think anyone's talked about not building -32bit packages, just about not supporting a 32-bit kernel. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 19:22:14 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:23:58 +0200, Johannes Meixner wrote:
I don't know if "voting with the feets" is excatly within the project's policies but I assume there exists some kind of voting mechanism in openSUSE to make decisions ;-)
Maybe the phrase doesn't translate - "voting with your feet" means that when something doesn't meet your needs, you go somewhere else to get something that does.
What Per is saying is that if people who want x86 support from openSUSE don't get it, they'll find a distro that does.
Which, if the stats Richard has are accurate, means we might lose, what, a dozen users? ;) (Exaggeration for effect)
A lot of the stuff we include (I prefer "include" over "support") might possibly have even less users. iSCSI anyone? SNMP?
False equivalency. We're not talking about features, we're talking about an entire platform.
Agree, but it does go to show that we support stuff/features that are used by only a very tiny number of users. How about autoyast?
Without 42.1/Leap for 32bit, for my professional needs, I would remain with 13.2 for a while, then eventually switch to <somethingelse-32bit> for xen guests. I have a strong sentimental attachment to open/SUSE, but when it has to go, it has to go. It would be nice to run 32bit apps on a 64bit host though.
I don't think anyone's talked about not building -32bit packages, just about not supporting a 32-bit kernel.
I have yet to test it thoroughly, but I am pretty certain 32bit apps on a 64bit host will fit my main requirement just fine. We don't build enough -32bit packages though. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (24.9°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015, 20:27:55 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote: [...]
I don't think anyone's talked about not building -32bit packages, just about not supporting a 32-bit kernel.
I have yet to test it thoroughly, but I am pretty certain 32bit apps on a 64bit host will fit my main requirement just fine. We don't build enough -32bit packages though.
which packages exactly are missing? I believe these can be summarized and added to the *-32bit set, but fwiw I can run all my needed 32-bit apps on 64-bit for quite a while, so _I_ don't miss any... Cheers. l8er manfred
On 28/08/15 21:08, Manfred Hollstein wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015, 20:27:55 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote: [...]
I don't think anyone's talked about not building -32bit packages, just about not supporting a 32-bit kernel.
I have yet to test it thoroughly, but I am pretty certain 32bit apps on a 64bit host will fit my main requirement just fine. We don't build enough -32bit packages though.
which packages exactly are missing? I believe these can be summarized and added to the *-32bit set, but fwiw I can run all my needed 32-bit apps on 64-bit for quite a while, so _I_ don't miss any...Sali Manfred
For instance, last I looked I couldn't find postfix-32bit and apache2-32bit. Maybe I'm going blind, assistance most welcome. /Per -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
For instance, last I looked I couldn't find postfix-32bit and apache2-32bit. Maybe I'm going blind, assistance most welcome.
Nowadays, http servers like apache have to be used in conjunction with SSL for security reasons. bad news is that openSSL is in orders of magnitude slower in 32 bit hosts, that will spoil the fun, depending on what your traffic needs are, in a annoying or deal-breaking way. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Saturday 2015-08-29 01:32, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
For instance, last I looked I couldn't find postfix-32bit and apache2-32bit. Maybe I'm going blind, assistance most welcome.
SSL for security reasons. bad news is that openSSL is in orders of magnitude slower in 32 bit hosts
On i586 maybe, but on x32? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 29 August 2015 at 22:10, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@inai.de> wrote:
On Saturday 2015-08-29 01:32, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
For instance, last I looked I couldn't find postfix-32bit and apache2-32bit. Maybe I'm going blind, assistance most welcome.
SSL for security reasons. bad news is that openSSL is in orders of magnitude slower in 32 bit hosts
On i586 maybe, but on x32?
Apparently - http://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1410210-LI-UBUNTU64990&sha=4899bb2&p=2 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Saturday 2015-08-29 22:16, Richard Brown wrote:
On 29 August 2015 at 22:10, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@inai.de> wrote:
On Saturday 2015-08-29 01:32, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
For instance, last I looked I couldn't find postfix-32bit and apache2-32bit. Maybe I'm going blind, assistance most welcome.
SSL for security reasons. bad news is that openSSL is in orders of magnitude slower in 32 bit hosts
On i586 maybe, but on x32?
Apparently - http://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1410210-LI-UBUNTU64990&sha=4899bb2&p=2
That does not really answer the question - there is no bar showing the -mx32 flag. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 20:27:55 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
False equivalency. We're not talking about features, we're talking about an entire platform.
Agree, but it does go to show that we support stuff/features that are used by only a very tiny number of users. How about autoyast?
Again, that's a false equivalency. Building a package and building a full distribution are not even *close* to the same thing.
Without 42.1/Leap for 32bit, for my professional needs, I would remain with 13.2 for a while, then eventually switch to <somethingelse-32bit> for xen guests. I have a strong sentimental attachment to open/SUSE, but when it has to go, it has to go. It would be nice to run 32bit apps on a 64bit host though.
I don't think anyone's talked about not building -32bit packages, just about not supporting a 32-bit kernel.
I have yet to test it thoroughly, but I am pretty certain 32bit apps on a 64bit host will fit my main requirement just fine. We don't build enough -32bit packages though.
Well, then, there's your answer. Solve the actual problem rather than building a full distro to work around the problem. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 20:27:55 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
False equivalency. We're not talking about features, we're talking about an entire platform.
Agree, but it does go to show that we support stuff/features that are used by only a very tiny number of users. How about autoyast?
Again, that's a false equivalency. Building a package and building a full distribution are not even *close* to the same thing.
Without 42.1/Leap for 32bit, for my professional needs, I would remain with 13.2 for a while, then eventually switch to <somethingelse-32bit> for xen guests. I have a strong sentimental attachment to open/SUSE, but when it has to go, it has to go. It would be nice to run 32bit apps on a 64bit host though.
I don't think anyone's talked about not building -32bit packages, just about not supporting a 32-bit kernel.
I have yet to test it thoroughly, but I am pretty certain 32bit apps on a 64bit host will fit my main requirement just fine. We don't build enough -32bit packages though.
Well, then, there's your answer. Solve the actual problem rather than building a full distro to work around the problem.
For the last ten years it has not been a work-around. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.5°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:29:20 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 20:27:55 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
False equivalency. We're not talking about features, we're talking about an entire platform.
Agree, but it does go to show that we support stuff/features that are used by only a very tiny number of users. How about autoyast?
Again, that's a false equivalency. Building a package and building a full distribution are not even *close* to the same thing.
Without 42.1/Leap for 32bit, for my professional needs, I would remain with 13.2 for a while, then eventually switch to <somethingelse-32bit> for xen guests. I have a strong sentimental attachment to open/SUSE, but when it has to go, it has to go. It would be nice to run 32bit apps on a 64bit host though.
I don't think anyone's talked about not building -32bit packages, just about not supporting a 32-bit kernel.
I have yet to test it thoroughly, but I am pretty certain 32bit apps on a 64bit host will fit my main requirement just fine. We don't build enough -32bit packages though.
Well, then, there's your answer. Solve the actual problem rather than building a full distro to work around the problem.
For the last ten years it has not been a work-around.
Times change. Technology changes. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 28/08/15 22:14, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 20:27:55 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
False equivalency. We're not talking about features, we're talking about an entire platform.
Agree, but it does go to show that we support stuff/features that are used by only a very tiny number of users. How about autoyast?
Again, that's a false equivalency. Building a package and building a full distribution are not even *close* to the same thing.
I think you missing the point, Jim. There is a lot more to support iSCSI and autoyast than simply building the packages. We support iSCSI setup in YaST for instance, autoYaST is everywhere. These are complex tools with a tiny number of openSUSE users, yet we support them. Dropping 32bit releases primarily because of a small number of users just isn't a good argument, when the same doesn't apply elsewhere. /Per -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:37:53 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
On 28/08/15 22:14, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 20:27:55 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
False equivalency. We're not talking about features, we're talking about an entire platform.
Agree, but it does go to show that we support stuff/features that are used by only a very tiny number of users. How about autoyast?
Again, that's a false equivalency. Building a package and building a full distribution are not even *close* to the same thing.
I think you missing the point, Jim. There is a lot more to support iSCSI and autoyast than simply building the packages. We support iSCSI setup in YaST for instance, autoYaST is everywhere. These are complex tools with a tiny number of openSUSE users, yet we support them. Dropping 32bit releases primarily because of a small number of users just isn't a good argument, when the same doesn't apply elsewhere.
No, I'm not missing the point, Per. The difference between maintaining a package like autoyast and building and testing an entire distribution is vast. You seem to think there's an equivalence to be drawn there; there isn't. The two aren't even in the same *league*. When autoyast takes half the build service servers to build, test, and deploy, then we might have something to talk about. Ultimately, there are enough *people* who care about continuing autoyast development. If there are enough who care about continuing to develop a 32-bit Leap release, then it'll happen. The current maintainer has said he won't do it, doesn't see the need for it, and has better things to do with his time. That's his call to make. That's how OSS works. If someone else is interested, then get involved. Tell the current maintainer you want to try to do this and get some help or pointers to the right help. I don't know what those resources are - but I don't care to find out, because I don't need (or want) a 32-bit release. Continuing to draw false equivalencies to try to force/convince someone who doesn't want to do a 32-bit distribution release isn't going to work. You've been around OSS development for some time - you know how this works. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 00:45, Jim Henderson wrote:
The difference between maintaining a package like autoyast and building and testing an entire distribution is vast.
It has been suggested to build but not test. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXg/SQACgkQja8UbcUWM1yNGAEAj/pRov1LTiVlFd26a8KKmtcd ZmHZqaXGPCKkc4Hl6QQA/iDjw7uJCjyFSbp2IYUiDOH13+UrztGBPPYt9wc60XPH =sRO8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 02:30:28 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-29 00:45, Jim Henderson wrote:
The difference between maintaining a package like autoyast and building and testing an entire distribution is vast.
It has been suggested to build but not test.
Yeah, because that'll work, Carlos. Official builds that aren't tested - when an issue comes up, that won't get spread all over the press. Not at all. Those who want to build it are welcome to build it on their own, as an unofficial build. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 21:57, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 02:30:28 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Those who want to build it are welcome to build it on their own, as an unofficial build.
If openSUSE is really open, we have to be able to build it using OBS and publish it on the mirrors, with official support. Same as, for instance, Evergreen, KDE3, etc. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXiMnoACgkQja8UbcUWM1yf8wEAg+3u6PGGSmHDbeWQHbOKvO0M ec0LqIRLrXCs4FV4J/8A/32R9jfCmo7p9TChwFGgngqhQZeF66R10EmOtHoFgVrs =WUmY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 00:30:18 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
If openSUSE is really open, we have to be able to build it using OBS and publish it on the mirrors, with official support. Same as, for instance, Evergreen, KDE3, etc.
That doesn't follow at all. Just because it's "open" doesn't mean there's a requirement to (a) build it using OBS, or (b) that it has official support. You are confusing "open" with "must do what I say/want". Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On August 29, 2015 8:24:11 PM EDT, Jim Henderson <hendersj@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 00:30:18 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
If openSUSE is really open, we have to be able to build it using OBS and publish it on the mirrors, with official support. Same as, for instance, Evergreen, KDE3, etc.
Carlos, Just a little clarification. OBS is 2 things: - first it is the software required to run a build farm. In that sense, OBS is FOSS. - second it is a set of servers that build the openSUSE distro and run the OBS software. It has an awesome ability to build 10's of thousands of packages a day. I suspect if 32-bit is made a port instead of a main release, the scheduling algorithm could be adjusted to introduce a day or 2 of delay when OBS is backed up and it would address much of the load issue. (Ie. OBS has periods of low load most weeks. Lowering 32-bit packages priority would greatly accelerate how fast 64-bit packages would get built.) - as to the mirrors, they are not under opensuse's control. They individually decide what they mirror. - official support, I'm not sure what that even means as relates to openSUSE. Greg -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-30 06:13, greg.freemyer@gmail.com wrote:
- official support, I'm not sure what that even means as relates to openSUSE.
In this context, same as the KDE3 or Evergreen folks got and get. Like help to get started, because very few people know how to do a distribution. People use susestudio, but I'd guess that building a 32 bit spin in it will not be possible. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXi1SwACgkQja8UbcUWM1zTdwD8DiH2jjj3yIqMC/waX4Fndlbu WEcURqD4JVXl80XVZCQBAKDrnveJupjciUWJ/LgovNIM78wkVMc+eiXUoRRsPBEC =WMhm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 30 August 2015 at 12:04, Carlos E. R. <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> wrote:
In this context, same as the KDE3 or Evergreen folks got and get. Like help to get started, because very few people know how to do a distribution.
There was nothing 'official' about that, in the sense that official implies some organisation or governing body deciding upon the topic In those cases, the people involved just talked, and worked together Open project, open concepts. The vast majority of everything 'official' done by openSUSE is decided by those doing it If people need help getting their 32-bit spin together, they should know who to talk to (the current Factory team, Coolo, Dimstar, Max, etc) and where to find them (email, this list, and IRC) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On August 30, 2015 6:04:28 AM EDT, "Carlos E. R." <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-30 06:13, greg.freemyer@gmail.com wrote:
- official support, I'm not sure what that even means as relates to openSUSE.
In this context, same as the KDE3 or Evergreen folks got and get. Like help to get started, because very few people know how to do a distribution. People use susestudio, but I'd guess that building a 32 bit spin in it will not be possible.
I too doubt susestudio will be part of the answer. Susestudio is mostly a wrapper around kiwi as I understand it. kiwi is a core tool for building opensuse boot media and is used to make the main release as well as the susestudio spins. (I have no hands on experience with kiwi). Greg -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Dne 30.08.2015 v 2:24 Jim Henderson napsal(a):
On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 00:30:18 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
If openSUSE is really open, we have to be able to build it using OBS and publish it on the mirrors, with official support. Same as, for instance, Evergreen, KDE3, etc.
That doesn't follow at all.
Just because it's "open" doesn't mean there's a requirement to (a) build it using OBS, or (b) that it has official support.
You are confusing "open" with "must do what I say/want". +1
Dne 29.08.2015 v 0:45 Jim Henderson napsal(a):
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:37:53 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
On 28/08/15 22:14, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 20:27:55 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
False equivalency. We're not talking about features, we're talking about an entire platform.
Agree, but it does go to show that we support stuff/features that are used by only a very tiny number of users. How about autoyast?
Again, that's a false equivalency. Building a package and building a full distribution are not even *close* to the same thing.
I think you missing the point, Jim. There is a lot more to support iSCSI and autoyast than simply building the packages. We support iSCSI setup in YaST for instance, autoYaST is everywhere. These are complex tools with a tiny number of openSUSE users, yet we support them. Dropping 32bit releases primarily because of a small number of users just isn't a good argument, when the same doesn't apply elsewhere.
No, I'm not missing the point, Per.
The difference between maintaining a package like autoyast and building and testing an entire distribution is vast. You seem to think there's an equivalence to be drawn there; there isn't. The two aren't even in the same *league*.
When autoyast takes half the build service servers to build, test, and deploy, then we might have something to talk about.
Ultimately, there are enough *people* who care about continuing autoyast development. If there are enough who care about continuing to develop a 32-bit Leap release, then it'll happen. The current maintainer has said he won't do it, doesn't see the need for it, and has better things to do with his time. That's his call to make.
That's how OSS works.
If someone else is interested, then get involved. Tell the current maintainer you want to try to do this and get some help or pointers to the right help. I don't know what those resources are - but I don't care to find out, because I don't need (or want) a 32-bit release.
Continuing to draw false equivalencies to try to force/convince someone who doesn't want to do a 32-bit distribution release isn't going to work. +1
It is however surprising how many people in this thread are trying to "volunteer" others time and resources, since they want to continue using their cheap hardware, and not only false equivalencies are used, also threats to leave and even what seems to be quotations from bible. M
Martin Pluskal composed on 2015-08-29 09:30 (UTC+0200):
It is however surprising how many people in this thread are trying to "volunteer" others time and resources
Not every piece of the construction puzzle is appropriately built by developers/coders/packagers. Not all testing can be done in VMs, or by robot testing methods. Some people voluntarily contribute by performing other tasks on which success depends, possibly most or even all non-programmer particpants in this thread. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 09:56, Felix Miata wrote:
Martin Pluskal composed on 2015-08-29 09:30 (UTC+0200):
It is however surprising how many people in this thread are trying to "volunteer" others time and resources
Not every piece of the construction puzzle is appropriately built by developers/coders/packagers. Not all testing can be done in VMs, or by robot testing methods. Some people voluntarily contribute by performing other tasks on which success depends, possibly most or even all non-programmer particpants in this thread.
Indeed. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXhrZ0ACgkQja8UbcUWM1yrMAD/eR+2LD7KeycmOXoGLvhNi85x JcHa3VNVgopLbOBaTAQA/28KMrh0q4NmVgip9ZcUdbmwfSq97R05poEW8L9gEN+U =gIjb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Dne 29.08.2015 v 9:56 Felix Miata napsal(a):
Martin Pluskal composed on 2015-08-29 09:30 (UTC+0200):
It is however surprising how many people in this thread are trying to "volunteer" others time and resources
Not every piece of the construction puzzle is appropriately built by developers/coders/packagers. Not all testing can be done in VMs, or by robot testing methods. Some people voluntarily contribute by performing other tasks on which success depends, possibly most or even all non-programmer particpants in this thread.
I think that you don't understand what I just said, so I will try to rephrase it; by building and supporting Leap for 32-bit and/or by continuing support for 32-bit Tumbleweed, as officially supported architectures, there is obligation (although in reality not always fulfilled) for package maintainers, openSUSE developers etc to resolve architecture specific issues/build failures and so on for 32-bit - in other words more work people, who do not necessarily want to use or support 32-bit. I hope I don't need to remind you that testing something, and reporting issues will not magically make something work, nor will it create working distribution, packagers/maintainers/developers are necessary, and by burdening members of community with supporting legacy hardware we are risking them leaving project. M
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:13:23 +0200, Martin Pluskal wrote:
Dne 29.08.2015 v 9:56 Felix Miata napsal(a):
Martin Pluskal composed on 2015-08-29 09:30 (UTC+0200):
It is however surprising how many people in this thread are trying to "volunteer" others time and resources
Not every piece of the construction puzzle is appropriately built by developers/coders/packagers. Not all testing can be done in VMs, or by robot testing methods. Some people voluntarily contribute by performing other tasks on which success depends, possibly most or even all non-programmer particpants in this thread.
I think that you don't understand what I just said, so I will try to rephrase it; by building and supporting Leap for 32-bit and/or by continuing support for 32-bit Tumbleweed, as officially supported architectures, there is obligation (although in reality not always fulfilled) for package maintainers, openSUSE developers etc to resolve architecture specific issues/build failures and so on for 32-bit - in other words more work people, who do not necessarily want to use or support 32-bit.
Honestly speaking, I doubt that the support of x86 in packages will become *so much* difficult in three years. Usually supporting the old hardware is far easier than supporting a new architecture. OTOH, I understand your concern, too. Seeing spontaneous i586 build failures isn't always a nicest moment. But, what if i586 is handled as semi-official like arm and ppc?
I hope I don't need to remind you that testing something, and reporting issues will not magically make something work, nor will it create working distribution, packagers/maintainers/developers are necessary, and by burdening members of community with supporting legacy hardware we are risking them leaving project.
Seemingly many people are very afraid of the legacy hardware. With my kernel subsystem maintainer hut on, I'd say that it's an overreaction. Remember that the kernel still supports 20 years old devices, and we'll likely keep supporting for some more years. Why? Just because there are still users. The continuity wins over everything. Isn't it difficult? Yeah, sometimes, but the reported bugs also decrease at the same time, so don't worry too much :) Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:13:23 +0200, Martin Pluskal wrote:
Dne 29.08.2015 v 9:56 Felix Miata napsal(a):
Martin Pluskal composed on 2015-08-29 09:30 (UTC+0200):
It is however surprising how many people in this thread are trying to "volunteer" others time and resources
Not every piece of the construction puzzle is appropriately built by developers/coders/packagers. Not all testing can be done in VMs, or by robot testing methods. Some people voluntarily contribute by performing other tasks on which success depends, possibly most or even all non-programmer particpants in this thread.
I think that you don't understand what I just said, so I will try to rephrase it; by building and supporting Leap for 32-bit and/or by continuing support for 32-bit Tumbleweed, as officially supported architectures, there is obligation (although in reality not always fulfilled) for package maintainers, openSUSE developers etc to resolve architecture specific issues/build failures and so on for 32-bit - in other words more work people, who do not necessarily want to use or support 32-bit.
Honestly speaking, I doubt that the support of x86 in packages will become *so much* difficult in three years. Usually supporting the old hardware is far easier than supporting a new architecture. I agree that it is unlikely in next few years to become significant issue, but I vaguely recall seeing slightly more build failures for
Dne 29.08.2015 v 20:39 Takashi Iwai napsal(a): packages in OBS for x86 vs 84_64, also upstream developers might not be very eager to help with non x86_64 architecture, so packager can end up on their own.
OTOH, I understand your concern, too. Seeing spontaneous i586 build failures isn't always a nicest moment. But, what if i586 is handled as semi-official like arm and ppc?
That would be most appropriate solution in my opinion.
I hope I don't need to remind you that testing something, and reporting issues will not magically make something work, nor will it create working distribution, packagers/maintainers/developers are necessary, and by burdening members of community with supporting legacy hardware we are risking them leaving project.
Seemingly many people are very afraid of the legacy hardware. With my kernel subsystem maintainer hut on, I'd say that it's an overreaction. Remember that the kernel still supports 20 years old devices, and we'll likely keep supporting for some more years. Why? Just because there are still users. The continuity wins over everything. Isn't it difficult? Yeah, sometimes, but the reported bugs also decrease at the same time, so don't worry too much :)
I will dig some of ancient pieces hw that I still have my collection of old hardware and will start trying it with TW or SLES :) M
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 20:39, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:13:23 +0200,
I hope I don't need to remind you that testing something, and reporting issues will not magically make something work, nor will it create working distribution, packagers/maintainers/developers are necessary, and by burdening members of community with supporting legacy hardware we are risking them leaving project.
Seemingly many people are very afraid of the legacy hardware. With my kernel subsystem maintainer hut on, I'd say that it's an overreaction. Remember that the kernel still supports 20 years old devices, and we'll likely keep supporting for some more years. Why? Just because there are still users. The continuity wins over everything. Isn't it difficult? Yeah, sometimes, but the reported bugs also decrease at the same time, so don't worry too much :)
Notice that many of us that want a 32 bit system would be happy to continue using the same kernel. Why would we want to update that? The hardware is the same, no need to support new devices. It is the applications on top, specially those facing the network, that need updating (for security reasons). - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXiAewACgkQja8UbcUWM1y7kwD+J10KjCRXufN7tAutfShYD9vE 5fvmtPU2uONXoTEhCwUA/jMchfH3evKZiyLDDBNdNJPLi+9h/eQgI/uX4oqe3ld2 =4zUb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Carlos E. R. <robin.listas@telefonica.net> wrote:
Notice that many of us that want a 32 bit system would be happy to continue using the same kernel. Why would we want to update that? The hardware is the same, no need to support new devices.
You are first going to miss all security updates and second, systemd regularly bumps the minimum kernel version required (currently 3.7.. next step probably 3.16 ) you would have to freeze at least the base system too. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 09:30, Martin Pluskal wrote:
also threats to leave
Huh? Not threats. Simple facts: if people have 32 bit hardware and it is not going to be supported by openSUSE, it is obvious they will have to go elsewhere. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXhri4ACgkQja8UbcUWM1zK9gEAjuDZF+t4G1JvcqatS9i4RFeZ BfwMOvjQI0odcNtQw8IA/AjfdixRtHU8yKndHlVDOT6Mse8cOjU4ZGNnv48SXOfc =JQoJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 03:05:50PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-08-29 09:30, Martin Pluskal wrote:
also threats to leave
Huh? Not threats.
Simple facts: if people have 32 bit hardware and it is not going to be supported by openSUSE, it is obvious they will have to go elsewhere.
Not necessarily. People having _only_ 32-bit hardware would be quite rare today. And if you have a mix, is absence of an official 32-bit build reason to migrate even the 64-bit ones? Someone might but not everyone. And even for those 32-bit machines, there are other options, like leaving them on Evergreen 13.1. Someone might even take it as the push to finally upgrade. So yes, there are probably some people who would be so angry that they would move all their systems to a different distribution. But I don't think such extreme approach would be taken by majority of current i586 openSUSE users. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 18:44:20 +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 03:05:50PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-08-29 09:30, Martin Pluskal wrote:
also threats to leave
Huh? Not threats.
Simple facts: if people have 32 bit hardware and it is not going to be supported by openSUSE, it is obvious they will have to go elsewhere.
Not necessarily. People having _only_ 32-bit hardware would be quite rare today. And if you have a mix, is absence of an official 32-bit build reason to migrate even the 64-bit ones? Someone might but not everyone. And even for those 32-bit machines, there are other options, like leaving them on Evergreen 13.1. Someone might even take it as the push to finally upgrade.
So yes, there are probably some people who would be so angry that they would move all their systems to a different distribution. But I don't think such extreme approach would be taken by majority of current i586 openSUSE users.
I think it's naive. Usually annoyance is more driving power than goodness. If we discontinue the 32bit support completely, it'd be just like a famous speech: "old soldiers never die, they just fade away." It's a good chance to try another better one, after all. IMO, the biggest problem is that we have no plan to rescue such users but it looks as if we'll just abandon them, so far. If the migration is tested and supported in some level, we can encourage that course. Or, we may ask more vocally for a user group who is willing to maintain a semi-official i586 image. I personally am convinced about the drop of i586 official image from Leap. But the argument should be rather more constructive. Instead of shouting about how bad and minor 32bit became, we should show better our goal, assigning more our resources to improving the quality of x86-64 image, and also show the rescue plans like the above. Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/29/2015 02:20 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
I think it's naive. Usually annoyance is more driving power than goodness. If we discontinue the 32bit support completely, it'd be just like a famous speech: "old soldiers never die, they just fade away." It's a good chance to try another better one, after all.
Old programmers never die. They just smell that way. ;-) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-29 18:44, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 03:05:50PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-08-29 09:30, Martin Pluskal wrote:
also threats to leave
Huh? Not threats.
Simple facts: if people have 32 bit hardware and it is not going to be supported by openSUSE, it is obvious they will have to go elsewhere.
Not necessarily. People having _only_ 32-bit hardware would be quite rare today. And if you have a mix, is absence of an official 32-bit build reason to migrate even the 64-bit ones? Someone might but not everyone. And even for those 32-bit machines, there are other options, like leaving them on Evergreen 13.1. Someone might even take it as the push to finally upgrade.
Well, of course. I would keep my normal use machines (64 bit) on openSUSE, unless another big reason arose. Like finding that the pasture is greener on the other side, LOL :-p
So yes, there are probably some people who would be so angry that they would move all their systems to a different distribution. But I don't think such extreme approach would be taken by majority of current i586 openSUSE users.
I don't know about anger. But it makes some sense to use a single distro for all, because it is less "training" effort. Me, I'm so accustomed to openSUSE that I find the idea of migrating disgusting. But I might have to migrate my server, if the hardware doesn't break when support for 13.1 runs out. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXiBRwACgkQja8UbcUWM1w+WgD/QfI0t4fYPaktfXE3wmcVC9T/ kWC3PiVOZeqBhrjdVq0A/212JHWsrEawWXF9P5t557vXWhDpNC6dC5rKI9ZC/G/i =ONvq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 03:05:50PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-08-29 09:30, Martin Pluskal wrote:
also threats to leave
Huh? Not threats.
Simple facts: if people have 32 bit hardware and it is not going to be supported by openSUSE, it is obvious they will have to go elsewhere.
Not necessarily. People having _only_ 32-bit hardware would be quite rare today. And if you have a mix, is absence of an official 32-bit build reason to migrate even the 64-bit ones? Someone might but not everyone. And even for those 32-bit machines, there are other options, like leaving them on Evergreen 13.1. Someone might even take it as the push to finally upgrade.
So yes, there are probably some people who would be so angry that they would move all their systems to a different distribution.
Not for reasons of anger, only simple necessity. As I think I have said before, I have a strong sentimental tie to open/SUSE, but if it ceases to suit my purposes, I have to look elsewhere.
But I don't think such extreme approach would be taken by majority of current i586 openSUSE users.
Well, given that openSUSE appears to be planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users", I expect those users are planning to abandon current openSUSE :-( -- Per Jessen, Zürich (16.9°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Per Jessen composed on 2015-09-05 27:27 (UTC+0200):
Michal Kubecek wrote:
Not necessarily. People having _only_ 32-bit hardware would be quite rare today. And if you have a mix, is absence of an official 32-bit build reason to migrate even the 64-bit ones? Someone might but not everyone. And even for those 32-bit machines, there are other options, like leaving them on Evergreen 13.1. Someone might even take it as the push to finally upgrade.
So yes, there are probably some people who would be so angry that they would move all their systems to a different distribution.
Not for reasons of anger, only simple necessity. As I think I have said before, I have a strong sentimental tie to open/SUSE, but if it ceases to suit my purposes, I have to look elsewhere.
But I don't think such extreme approach would be taken by majority of current i586 openSUSE users.
Well, given that openSUSE appears to be planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users", I expect those users are planning to abandon current openSUSE :-(
Speaking of "current" openSUSE users, has anyone considered the hundreds or thousands of reputed openSUSE-based derivatives? I have to guess most if not all of those that aren't true forks and now offer 32 bit would have to cease doing so if enough manpower to maintain a port isn't realized. Or, maybe a useful number of those providing them could be induced to contribute to a 32 bit port maintenance process. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Saturday 05 of September 2015 00:27:23 Per Jessen wrote:
Well, given that openSUSE appears to be planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users"
That's only your (mis)interpretation of what is happening. OpenSUSE is not planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users". Only those who insist on staying with 32-bit distribution so strongly that they would rather change the distribution than upgrade to a 64-bit system. I believe most current i586 openSUSE users do not use this architecture out of necessity. There may be some, sure, but IMHO it's just a small fraction; some (like you) do it for their beliefs but most of them only because of inertia and lack of an impulse strong enough to push them into migration. For those, switching to x86_64 may be an inconvenience - and we should do our best to it as small one as we can - but much less of inconvenience that moving to a different distribution. And they should also consider that others are probably going to do the same, sooner or later (some already declared so). In other words: I don't believe majority of current i586 openSUSE users would switch to a different distribution just because of the lack of an i586 Leap release. Not by far. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Monday, September 07, 2015 08:20:17 AM Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Saturday 05 of September 2015 00:27:23 Per Jessen wrote:
Well, given that openSUSE appears to be planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users"
That's only your (mis)interpretation of what is happening. OpenSUSE is not planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users". Only those who insist on staying with 32-bit distribution so strongly that they would rather change the distribution than upgrade to a 64-bit system.
I believe most current i586 openSUSE users do not use this architecture out of necessity. There may be some, sure, but IMHO it's just a small fraction; some (like you) do it for their beliefs but most of them only because of inertia and lack of an impulse strong enough to push them into migration. For those, switching to x86_64 may be an inconvenience - and we should do our best to it as small one as we can - but much less of inconvenience that moving to a different distribution. And they should also consider that others are probably going to do the same, sooner or later (some already declared so).
In other words: I don't believe majority of current i586 openSUSE users would switch to a different distribution just because of the lack of an i586 Leap release. Not by far.
Michal Kubeček
Can only speak for myself in this very long discussion. I always detested the Microsoftisch way of commerce that implicated that if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out of using our Microsoft-ware. Reason for me to abandon that company since windows 3.1.1 At home I have now two 586 computers and one 64 bit system (max. memory 2GB). Loosing the use of openSUSE for two thirds of my computers is not an idea I can befriended with. Hope that list-members who find them self in a similar situation will speak up. Assume that a broader discussion should start as the factory list is most probably not read by every SUSE enthusiast. Just try to find out how big the group of 586 owners is. . . -- Linux User 183145 using KDE4 and LXDE on a Pentium IV , powered by openSUSE 20150903 (x86_64) Kernel: 4.1.6-2-desktop KDE Development Platform: 4.14.10 13:28pm up 4 days 3:34, 2 users, load average: 0.27, 0.31, 0.45 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Monday 07 of September 2015 13:44:27 C. Brouerius van Nidek wrote:
I always detested the Microsoftisch way of commerce that implicated that if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out of using our Microsoft-ware. Reason for me to abandon that company since windows 3.1.1
Really, this is getting ridiculous. Could we, please, stop confusing the things by calling 12 year old machines "latest of hardware" and similar? Consumer grade 64-bit CPU's are with us since 2003, maybe even longer. In the world of home user PC's, 12 years is ages. I'm far from denying there are still 32-bit machines around and running. But calling 64-bit systems in general "shiny new" or "latest of hardware" in order to draw a picture that 64-bit consumer hardware is some novelty only the wealthy of us can afford, that is a blatant manipulation and twisting the reality. Back in 2005, you could say "latest of hardware". But now we have 2015 and only the oldest consumer PC's are 32-bit. x86_64 is not a novelty, it's not "latest of hardware" (most of them, of course) or "shiny new", it's the vast majority. Pretending that dropping i586 means "if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out" is an enormous exaggeration at best.
Hope that list-members who find them self in a similar situation will speak up. Assume that a broader discussion should start as the factory list is most probably not read by every SUSE enthusiast. Just try to find out how big the group of 586 owners is.
This is a problem. People who insist on 32-bit (for various reason) will speak up. But that won't tell you how big the group is (compared to the silent majority). Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015.09.07 02:14, Michal Kubecek wrote:
I always detested the Microsoftisch way of commerce that implicated that if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out of using our Microsoft-ware. Reason for me to abandon that company since windows 3.1.1 Really, this is getting ridiculous. Could we, please, stop confusing the
On Monday 07 of September 2015 13:44:27 C. Brouerius van Nidek wrote: things by calling 12 year old machines "latest of hardware" and similar? Consumer grade 64-bit CPU's are with us since 2003, maybe even longer. In the world of home user PC's, 12 years is ages.
Since consumer-grade 32-bit and 64-bit CPUs existed in the market concurrently for several years, it would be better to state when 32-bit "new" systems ceased being sold. This is probably somewhere around 2007-2010. Referencing the minimum system requirements for 13.2 ... - https://en.opensuse.org/Hardware_requirements (Pentium* III 500 MHz, 1 GB physical RAM) ... we can speculate/infer that 13.2 can run on equipment 15 years old, and Leap perhaps 8 years old.
I'm far from denying there are still 32-bit machines around and running. But calling 64-bit systems in general "shiny new" or "latest of hardware" in order to draw a picture that 64-bit consumer hardware is some novelty only the wealthy of us can afford, that is a blatant manipulation and twisting the reality.
Back in 2005, you could say "latest of hardware". But now we have 2015 and only the oldest consumer PC's are 32-bit. x86_64 is not a novelty, it's not "latest of hardware" (most of them, of course) or "shiny new", it's the vast majority. Pretending that dropping i586 means "if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out" is an enormous exaggeration at best.
I don't think this is the intent of the _general_ discussion point surrounding 32-bit support. It's _not_ an argument that 64-bit systems are so new that 32-bit cannot be dropped. Nor the opposite end of the spectrum, of trying to use legacy systems from the 1990s [1]. A 10-year old machine with 2 GB of RAM is still adequate for some purposes; X environments such as LXDE and XFCE enable these machines to be useful for light tasks (e-mail, simple web browsing). If the CPU supports 64-bit, there may be no practical advantage of a 64-bit OS in this situation, and may instead cause reduction in available resources (RAM, disk space). I think we should just be straightforward about what will be "left behind" with the change to 64-bit only, regardless of whether 32-bit use is due to choice or "necessity". As far as the hardware, it is -- to quote from a movie -- "old, but not obsolete".
Hope that list-members who find them self in a similar situation will speak up. Assume that a broader discussion should start as the factory list is most probably not read by every SUSE enthusiast. Just try to find out how big the group of 586 owners is. This is a problem. People who insist on 32-bit (for various reason) will speak up. But that won't tell you how big the group is (compared to the silent majority).
Michal Kubeček
[1] (off topic, for fun) Amazingly, some have found ways: - http://hackaday.com/2014/10/23/hackaday-retro-edition-a-286-on-the-internet/ - http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/mac-plus-introduce-modern-web/ -- Brian Y. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 02:45:25PM -0500, Brian F. Yulga wrote:
On 2015.09.07 02:14, Michal Kubecek wrote:
I always detested the Microsoftisch way of commerce that implicated that if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out of using our Microsoft-ware. Reason for me to abandon that company since windows 3.1.1 Really, this is getting ridiculous. Could we, please, stop confusing the
On Monday 07 of September 2015 13:44:27 C. Brouerius van Nidek wrote: things by calling 12 year old machines "latest of hardware" and similar? Consumer grade 64-bit CPU's are with us since 2003, maybe even longer. In the world of home user PC's, 12 years is ages.
Since consumer-grade 32-bit and 64-bit CPUs existed in the market concurrently for several years, it would be better to state when 32-bit "new" systems ceased being sold. This is probably somewhere around 2007-2010. Referencing the minimum system requirements for 13.2 ...
- https://en.opensuse.org/Hardware_requirements (Pentium* III 500 MHz, 1 GB physical RAM)
... we can speculate/infer that 13.2 can run on equipment 15 years old, and Leap perhaps 8 years old.
I'm far from denying there are still 32-bit machines around and running. But calling 64-bit systems in general "shiny new" or "latest of hardware" in order to draw a picture that 64-bit consumer hardware is some novelty only the wealthy of us can afford, that is a blatant manipulation and twisting the reality.
Back in 2005, you could say "latest of hardware". But now we have 2015 and only the oldest consumer PC's are 32-bit. x86_64 is not a novelty, it's not "latest of hardware" (most of them, of course) or "shiny new", it's the vast majority. Pretending that dropping i586 means "if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out" is an enormous exaggeration at best.
I don't think this is the intent of the _general_ discussion point surrounding 32-bit support. It's _not_ an argument that 64-bit systems are so new that 32-bit cannot be dropped. Nor the opposite end of the spectrum, of trying to use legacy systems from the 1990s [1].
A 10-year old machine with 2 GB of RAM is still adequate for some purposes; X environments such as LXDE and XFCE enable these machines to be useful for light tasks (e-mail, simple web browsing). If the CPU supports 64-bit, there may be no practical advantage of a 64-bit OS in this situation, and may instead cause reduction in available resources (RAM, disk space).
I think we should just be straightforward about what will be "left behind" with the change to 64-bit only, regardless of whether 32-bit use is due to choice or "necessity".
As far as the hardware, it is -- to quote from a movie -- "old, but not obsolete".
Please read my mail again, carefully. You should notice it wasn't about how/if the 32-bit hardware is obsolete. All it was about was the absurdity of calling 64-bit systems in general "latest of hardware". Your response therefore completely misses its point. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015.09.07 15:31, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 02:45:25PM -0500, Brian F. Yulga wrote:
On 2015.09.07 02:14, Michal Kubecek wrote:
I always detested the Microsoftisch way of commerce that implicated that if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out of using our Microsoft-ware. Reason for me to abandon that company since windows 3.1.1 Really, this is getting ridiculous. Could we, please, stop confusing the
On Monday 07 of September 2015 13:44:27 C. Brouerius van Nidek wrote: things by calling 12 year old machines "latest of hardware" and similar? Consumer grade 64-bit CPU's are with us since 2003, maybe even longer. In the world of home user PC's, 12 years is ages. Since consumer-grade 32-bit and 64-bit CPUs existed in the market concurrently for several years, it would be better to state when 32-bit "new" systems ceased being sold. This is probably somewhere around 2007-2010. Referencing the minimum system requirements for 13.2 ...
- https://en.opensuse.org/Hardware_requirements (Pentium* III 500 MHz, 1 GB physical RAM)
... we can speculate/infer that 13.2 can run on equipment 15 years old, and Leap perhaps 8 years old.
I'm far from denying there are still 32-bit machines around and running. But calling 64-bit systems in general "shiny new" or "latest of hardware" in order to draw a picture that 64-bit consumer hardware is some novelty only the wealthy of us can afford, that is a blatant manipulation and twisting the reality.
Back in 2005, you could say "latest of hardware". But now we have 2015 and only the oldest consumer PC's are 32-bit. x86_64 is not a novelty, it's not "latest of hardware" (most of them, of course) or "shiny new", it's the vast majority. Pretending that dropping i586 means "if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out" is an enormous exaggeration at best. I don't think this is the intent of the _general_ discussion point surrounding 32-bit support. It's _not_ an argument that 64-bit systems are so new that 32-bit cannot be dropped. Nor the opposite end of the spectrum, of trying to use legacy systems from the 1990s [1].
A 10-year old machine with 2 GB of RAM is still adequate for some purposes; X environments such as LXDE and XFCE enable these machines to be useful for light tasks (e-mail, simple web browsing). If the CPU supports 64-bit, there may be no practical advantage of a 64-bit OS in this situation, and may instead cause reduction in available resources (RAM, disk space).
I think we should just be straightforward about what will be "left behind" with the change to 64-bit only, regardless of whether 32-bit use is due to choice or "necessity".
As far as the hardware, it is -- to quote from a movie -- "old, but not obsolete". Please read my mail again, carefully. You should notice it wasn't about how/if the 32-bit hardware is obsolete. All it was about was the absurdity of calling 64-bit systems in general "latest of hardware". Your response therefore completely misses its point.
Michal Kubeček
I wrote "_general_ discussion point", replying to both your response and what led to it, for which I do not think there was any suggestion that 64-bit is "shiny new". I also don't think anyone here is trying to argue that 12 year old machines are "latest of hardware". -- Brian Y. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 07/09/15 08:44, C. Brouerius van Nidek wrote:
Can only speak for myself in this very long discussion. I always detested the Microsoftisch way of commerce that implicated that if you do not get the latest of hardware you are out of using our Microsoft-ware. Reason for me to abandon that company since windows 3.1.1 At home I have now two 586 computers and one 64 bit system (max. memory 2GB). Loosing the use of openSUSE for two thirds of my computers is not an idea I can befriended with. Hope that list-members who find them self in a similar situation will speak up. Assume that a broader discussion should start as the factory list is most probably not read by every SUSE enthusiast. Just try to find out how big the group of 586 owners is. .
For want of finding a suitable place to 'leap' into this discussion, I'll take that penultimate paragraph as my cue. Having only just subscribed to this list I don't have the full thread to reply to individual sections, so here's a big combined braindump: As somebody who still employs a few 32-bit machines myself (indeed, I only have one - my main laptop - that is 64-bit), and as a user of (open)SUSE since 2003, I'll add my own name to the list of those who will be perturbed at the lack of a 32-bit option in the next openSUSE release. Whilst a couple of these machines are running 13.1 and I'd hoped to keep them on Evergreen until that reaches its expiry around the end of next year, I've also seen rumours to the effect that since Leap 42.1 will be an LTS release of sorts, the Evergreen workload would be considerably reduced by declaring that to be the current Evergreen release instead and abandoning 13.1. I've seen no further word on that but I hope that will not be the case. It's true that a small handful of dejected users on this factory mailing list may not seem significant, but to truly gauge the potential user base who will be upset by this we're going to just have to wait for the coming release, and the weeks and months that follow it. Most users of older 32-bit hardware are *less* likely (not unlikely) to be following lists regarding the state of cutting edge features. Indeed, only a small fraction of users of any distro follow mailing lists, forums, subreddits or whatever other sources of their distro's information. The majority only become aware of what's changing when they hear of a new release, go to download it or have already installed it. There's been repeated references to this magic unknown figure representing the current 32-bit openSUSE install base, and many of those pushing for an end to 32-bit support are loyal to Richard Brown's apparent knowledge of this information without knowing what the statistics actually are. Does this have to be a secret, because there seems to be a reluctance to just spit it out? The best clue would be if I quote Richard from earlier in this thread:
There is also the support lifetime of Leap to consider
32bit intel downloads have been declining for openSUSE from 11.4's release in March 2011 (when 32-bit media represented 55% of all openSUSE downloads) to date
By openSUSE 12.3 in March 2013 32-bit downloads had become the minority (40%) and that decline has continued unabated
Remember, 13.2 saw openSUSE's download numbers almost double compared to openSUSE 12.3. The proportion of 32-bit downloads have halved in the same period.
So in March 2013, the proportion of 32-bit downloads was 40%. Whilst overall downloads almost doubled with the 13.2 release, the *proportion* of 32-bit downloads halved. If that had read 'number' or 'total', we could assume that 32-bit had not just halved in number but now represented almost half of that again due to the overall user base doubling, but by saying 'proportion', that implies the percentage of 32-bit for 13.2 was around 20%. Sure, let's give or take a bit and accept that we're looking at a new release in two months from now, one year after 13.2 came out. So we might be looking at 10 to 15% using 32-bit machines come the time of the Leap 42.1 release. openSUSE is assumed to be installed on hundreds of thousands of machines/devices worldwide. Ten to fifteen percent of those is still an enormous figure! openSUSE is going to be amongst the first major distros to make this move. Once the first news items and reviews come out for Leap 42.1, and when this segment of the 95% of regular users who don't follow lists and the like get wind of the fact that they can no longer install their preferred distribution, I expect a degree of backlash. I'm not predicting a riot, but my recommendation would be to be up-front about this change in the press releases, don't try and brush it under the carpet. I know this info is freely available already but I don't think so many are actually aware yet of what is a significant change to come. Speak to the marketing peeps and put a very clear line in the release statements saying that 32-bit is dropped because of the significant drain on resources that it would engender. If 13.1 Evergreen is going to stick to its original course, direct 32-bit users to that and be clear about it. It's nonetheless surprising that this architecture is being dropped so soon. Take a look at the options in /usr/src/packages/RPMS/. (open)SUSE is now chasing the 64-bit ARM market, has support for ppc, sparc and more. All of these which add up to perhaps a couple of percent of the market. Sure, 64-bit ARM is growing and in two years from now, nearing the end of the Leap 42 lifecycle, it might be considerably more relevant. But this is an odd offering overall. openSUSE is effectively saying 'you can run the world's most popular architecture, or take your pick from among a bunch of obscure ones hardly anybody uses, but you want the world's number two most used architecture? No, sorry.' Essentially, any colour you like so long as it's green. I'm grateful to Takashi Iwai for some of his thoughtful comments, including his considerations of the likelihood of future kernel support. Look at i386 support which was only finally dropped by the kernel quite recently. That was a technology around twenty-five years old, but even 486 and early 586 users had almost disappeared off the radar by the time it was finally abandoned. On the contrary, we know that 32-bit machines are still everywhere, whether that be in slow-moving corporate environments or hobbyist gadgets. (Coincidental anecdote: this very weekend I was taking a rubbish sack down to the communal bins of my block here in France. I bumped into the lady who runs the building's syndicate, an extremely rich woman who inherited a large part of this majestic old building and hence several apartments of hundreds of square metres from her father; very pleasant nonetheless. As she returned upstairs, I noticed the box she'd deposited in the bin. An HP laptop computer. Expecting it to be top-of-the-range, I was nosey and had a look at the labels attached to the brand new box. Very strange. A sales receipt indicated it was bought in July this year. Yet it had an Intel Core Duo @2.0GHz and was preloaded with Vista 32-bit. I know France is a bit behind the times with some things but I have no idea where and why she could have bought this!) Unlike her, I live in by far and away the smallest 'apartment' (box) in this building in the city centre; we have therefore a nice mix of rich and poor. I'm most definitely in the latter group! So my own reasons for still having 32-bit machines is because to me they're very much still current and usable, and I can't afford to splash out continually for upgrades. It so happens that another contributor to this thread lives just up the road from here, literally, and runs older machines for the same reason. As a long-time openSUSE user, I've read a good number of articles, comments and threads in previous years from users in developing nations who say they obtain the distro on disc to install on multiple machines in their communities, and that for them high speed phone or internet connections are either unavailable or unaffordable. It would be logical to assume that people in these regions are likely to have a higher-than-average proportion of older and hence 32-bit machines. Are we no longer caring about this part of the userbase? openSUSE is embarking on its second Asia summit. Were it being held in one of the continent's less developed countries, imagine starting off with a keynote where all 32-bit users were asked to raise their hands, and then asked to leave the summit, because they're no longer relevant. I've read much of the reasoning for going 64-bit only, and I can see the predicament. There are some reasoned voices in here who have laid out some of the facts and the difficulties faced with continuing 32-bit. But there are also a number of very defensive and at times rather unpleasant folk of whom I'm not sure of their motivations other than sticking the knife in to those less fortunate than themselves; a sort of baying group of bullies. Granted, until now I've never followed the Factory list, but I've rarely seen such a disconnect between *some* of the openSUSE 'contributors' (broadly speaking) and regular users. Given that one of Linux's long-standing strong selling points has been that it runs very well on older hardware and allows you to keep such machines in use, for the sake of three more years of support for up to 15% of the user base, I think openSUSE should continue to offer 32-bit, and if it's a question of money and build machines, SUSE ought to donate some servers to the cause. Yes, they really should. There may be a complete separation of SUSE from openSUSE but still the former should contribute more to support the latter, if not financially then by way of hardware donations. If they want to achieve this virtuous circle of TW > SUSE > openSUSE (maybe it's a triangle then) they should be prepared to help out more in the regular user community, because that's where the interest for Tumbleweed and hence SUSE additions will come from later on. Alas, they've already abandoned 32-bit themselves with SLE12 so it seems they're bloody-minded on this issue. And if you don't think there'll be much of a migration effect from disgruntled users, actually I'd be inclined to agree. Many people don't want to give up on a distro they've become faithful to and will only voice their disapproval when it's too late, and in places (comments on blogs of articles of press releases) where nobody's listening. But some will silently depart, perhaps imparting a final flourish of anger in some unknown corner of the Internet. There are other choices. The recent Mint 17.2 release (http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=2890) offers 32-bit and provides support until 2019 (along with a stable KDE 4 version). I'm seriously considering it for at least one machine I administer. My folks, living on a UK basic pension, have a perfectly working 13.1 32-bit system which still fulfils all their rather limited computing needs. Neither they nor I really have the money to buy a new machine that doesn't even seem necessary from their perspective. It may be Mint for them. I began assembling that box around 2006, upgrading bits over the years, but at that time of the initial build, whilst 64-bit existed, there were still regular reports, articles and comments about how certain Linux software was not available / packaged for 64-bit. What's more, all the 64-bit hardware cost significantly more, so I went for 32-bit. Not long before, a PC magazine had published a big article about the folly of 64-bit, and how it would be many many years before we could seriously abandon 32-bit. I bought into that notion. Last year, a couple of friends were fed up with their Windows PC which had slowed to a crawl in typical style. Before I could even espouse the virtues of Linux which would restore their hardware to a zippy state, they'd already bought a new PC with Windows 8, which they quickly came to hate, and which had soon slowed to an equal speed. They were going to simply dump the old one until I offered it a new home. I was running oS 12.3 on a Pentium III 1.0GHz with the RAM maxed out at 1.5GB until just recently. Slow but it worked fine; performed a useful role as an Internet and music station in my old shared flat. This machine my friends gave me, which they only assembled in *2009*, is hence a big 'upgrade', being a P4 3.0GHz with 2GB RAM. It works very nicely as my new music production machine with AVLinux and Xfce, but it's also 32-bit. One of the last generation boards and CPUs before the 64-bit models. Even my one 64-bit machine is a 2007 model Dell laptop which I bought secondhand (though barely used) two years ago. To me, that's 'current'! I have little financial means but by reusing such 'old' gear I can have myself a nice little setup for doing my music and other multiple computing tasks. Buying two new or secondhand cheap 64-bit machines for myself and my folks, even two crappy noisy ones, is just not an option at present. I have a 2008 feature phone and a digital camera from 2003. That's life. So to summarize, I think it's just a bit too soon. One more 32-bit release with three years' support would have hit it just right in my opinion. I probably won't be abandoning the geeko, but for the first time in twelve years as a disciple, I'm seeing some arrogance in the decision-making here that I think is rather too dismissive. At a time when openSUSE is desperately trying to show it's still relevant, it's simultaneously dismissing the second-largest architectural chunk of its users. Not a great move. gumb -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 08 of September 2015 13:13:12 gumb wrote:
So in March 2013, the proportion of 32-bit downloads was 40%. Whilst overall downloads almost doubled with the 13.2 release, the *proportion* of 32-bit downloads halved. If that had read 'number' or 'total', we could assume that 32-bit had not just halved in number but now represented almost half of that again due to the overall user base doubling, but by saying 'proportion', that implies the percentage of 32-bit for 13.2 was around 20%. Sure, let's give or take a bit and accept that we're looking at a new release in two months from now, one year after 13.2 came out. So we might be looking at 10 to 15% using 32-bit machines come the time of the Leap 42.1 release.
The difference between downloads and users aside, you are still mixing two very different numbers: number of users with a 32-bit system and number of users with a 32-bit hardware. Even some of the most passionate advocates of keeping an i586 release admitted that they are actually using i586 openSUSE on a 64-bit capable hardware for various reasons.
It's nonetheless surprising that this architecture is being dropped so soon. Take a look at the options in /usr/src/packages/RPMS/. (open)SUSE is now chasing the 64-bit ARM market, has support for ppc, sparc and more. All of these which add up to perhaps a couple of percent of the market. Sure, 64-bit ARM is growing and in two years from now, nearing the end of the Leap 42 lifecycle, it might be considerably more relevant. But this is an odd offering overall. openSUSE is effectively saying 'you can run the world's most popular architecture, or take your pick from among a bunch of obscure ones hardly anybody uses, but you want the world's number two most used architecture?
This is plain wrong. None of the architectures you mentioned (ppc64, ARM64, sparc etc.) is really official and supported in the sense x86_64 is and i586 has been until now. What is (most likely) going to happen is moving i586 to the "ports", i.e. giving it the same status as ARM64, ppc64 etc. If someone is going to dedicate their effort to making it work, that is. (As people do for the others.)
I'm grateful to Takashi Iwai for some of his thoughtful comments, including his considerations of the likelihood of future kernel support. Look at i386 support which was only finally dropped by the kernel quite recently. That was a technology around twenty-five years old, but even 486 and early 586 users had almost disappeared off the radar by the time it was finally abandoned. On the contrary, we know that 32-bit machines are still everywhere, whether that be in slow-moving corporate environments or hobbyist gadgets.
This is a very different thing. Once an architecture is dropped by upstream, there is little chance any distribution would build it any more. Dropping an architecture from mainline is therefore much more destructive step than some distributions dropping it and it only makes sense it's going to happen much later. Please note that (1) most distributions stopped building 386-compatible packages years before 386 support was dropped by mainline kernel and (2) mainline kernel IIRC supports ~20 architectures, most of which (almost) no distributions actively support (and never did).
But there are also a number of very defensive and at times rather unpleasant folk of whom I'm not sure of their motivations other than sticking the knife in to those less fortunate than themselves; a sort of baying group of bullies.
A matter of perception. Someone could rather see bullies in those who insist others are obliged to work on providing i586 support while they are not willing to help with the work (not all, fortunately, some are willing to help). Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hi gumb, Thanks for your very long email, I dont have time right now to digest it all and address all the points I want to, but I want to snip right through and clear up a few points that stick out. On 8 September 2015 at 13:13, gumb <gumb@linuxmail.org> wrote:
It's true that a small handful of dejected users on this factory mailing list may not seem significant, but to truly gauge the potential user base who will be upset by this we're going to just have to wait for the coming release, and the weeks and months that follow it. Most users of older 32-bit hardware are *less* likely (not unlikely) to be following lists regarding the state of cutting edge features. Indeed, only a small fraction of users of any distro follow mailing lists, forums, subreddits or whatever other sources of their distro's information. The majority only become aware of what's changing when they hear of a new release, go to download it or have already installed it.
While I do not dismiss, discard, or seek to diminish the feedback from any users, you also have to accept that the volume and intensity of public complaints can be disproportionate to the number of people affected. The facts are pretty simple #1 openSUSE's 32-bit user base is shrinking, fast #2 The current contributors for building the media want to support 64-bit only, because of Fact #1 #3 There are clearly passionate users who will be impacted by this decision (though they can continue to use openSUSE 13.1 and 13.2 for some years still) #4 User feedback is great, but is often unlikely to change the opinion of what someone wants to do - remember we're a community of volunteers, and the greatest motivator for any volunteer is 'working on what they want to work on' #5 No contributors have stepped up and started to work with the existing build team to keep 32-bit support. #6 No one is blocking anyone from working on 32-bit support, but the people previously involved don't want to do it, and some people like me think it's not worth the effort (but that doesn't mean I mind if other people think I'm wrong - I'm equally happy when my opinion is accepted or not as long as openSUSE benefits)
There's been repeated references to this magic unknown figure representing the current 32-bit openSUSE install base, and many of those pushing for an end to 32-bit support are loyal to Richard Brown's apparent knowledge of this information without knowing what the statistics actually are. Does this have to be a secret, because there seems to be a reluctance to just spit it out?
There's no reluctance to just spit it out. I admit to a little bit of a tiredness to repetition - I don't want to repeatedly go into great detail over a topic which has been discussed openly already. For example, the statistics in question were part of my openSUSE Conference presentation You can see the slides with the graphics here: https://speakerdeck.com/sysrich/the-future-is-unwritten You can watch the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH99TSrfvq0
It's nonetheless surprising that this architecture is being dropped so soon. Take a look at the options in /usr/src/packages/RPMS/. (open)SUSE is now chasing the 64-bit ARM market, has support for ppc, sparc and more. All of these which add up to perhaps a couple of percent of the market. Sure, 64-bit ARM is growing and in two years from now, nearing the end of the Leap 42 lifecycle, it might be considerably more relevant. But this is an odd offering overall. openSUSE is effectively saying 'you can run the world's most popular architecture, or take your pick from among a bunch of obscure ones hardly anybody uses, but you want the world's number two most used architecture? No, sorry.' Essentially, any colour you like so long as it's green.
openSUSE's architecture support reflects the interest of the openSUSE community, and is a result of those contributors working on those architectures.
As a long-time openSUSE user, I've read a good number of articles, comments and threads in previous years from users in developing nations who say they obtain the distro on disc to install on multiple machines in their communities, and that for them high speed phone or internet connections are either unavailable or unaffordable. It would be logical to assume that people in these regions are likely to have a higher-than-average proportion of older and hence 32-bit machines. Are we no longer caring about this part of the userbase? openSUSE is embarking on its second Asia summit. Were it being held in one of the continent's less developed countries, imagine starting off with a keynote where all 32-bit users were asked to raise their hands, and then asked to leave the summit, because they're no longer relevant.
I was at the openSUSE Asia summit - all the hardware I saw used was 64-bit. I think it's actually quite narrow minded to think that developing countries must use ancient obsolete hardware - I think you'll find most of these countries embrace low-cost, but modern, hardware. Such trends are one of the reasons these nations are developing at the pace they are, because they're able to have a technical agility which more developed countries do not, normally because they're expending a great deal of effort supporting old, legacy, hardware and software...kind of like 32-bit architecture support in a Linux distribution ;)
Given that one of Linux's long-standing strong selling points has been that it runs very well on older hardware and allows you to keep such machines in use, for the sake of three more years of support for up to 15% of the user base, I think openSUSE should continue to offer 32-bit
But what if openSUSE has no contributors interested in working on it? And also, I continue to struggle with the mindset that somehow openSUSE must continue to find a way of run shiny new latest versions of everything on increasingly old hardware. New versions of openSUSE are an opportunity to provide our users with new technologies, new software, new versions. There must comes a time that the desire to develop, improve, and move forward must mean that support for the past doesn't bring the benefit of the time, effort, and cost required.
and if it's a question of money and build machines, SUSE ought to donate some servers to the cause. Yes, they really should. There may be a complete separation of SUSE from openSUSE but still the former should contribute more to support the latter, if not financially then by way of hardware donations. If they want to achieve this virtuous circle of TW > SUSE > openSUSE (maybe it's a triangle then) they should be prepared to help out more in the regular user community, because that's where the interest for Tumbleweed and hence SUSE additions will come from later on. Alas, they've already abandoned 32-bit themselves with SLE12 so it seems they're bloody-minded on this issue
What would the business case be that I should present to SUSE? SUSE are more than happy to invest in openSUSE, especially when it also brings benefits to themselves, but in the case of 32-bit support I cannot think of a pitch I could possibly bring to SUSE management that wouldn't be laughable "Please give us money and/or more hardware so we can support an architecture which you already don't support in your own products, you're never going to support in your products, and we're going to have to absolutely have to stop supporting in a few years anyway at the current rate of decline? Oh and by the way, we currently have no contributors interested in building for this architecture"
And if you don't think there'll be much of a migration effect from disgruntled users, actually I'd be inclined to agree. Many people don't want to give up on a distro they've become faithful to and will only voice their disapproval when it's too late, and in places (comments on blogs of articles of press releases) where nobody's listening. But some will silently depart, perhaps imparting a final flourish of anger in some unknown corner of the Internet.
I don't want to see people leave, but if they really do only have 32-bit capable hardware right now, I'd imagine the cost and effort of upgrading to cheap, maybe even second hand, 64-bit hardware is no more difficult than moving to a different distribution Obviously, there are emotions to take into account, so such rational options will not be considered by all. Therefore, I'm sure we will loose some people over this. I don't like it, but I accept it's a cost that comes with progress and I really think it's more important we do what is right for the long term sustainability of the Project than burn ourselves out trying to make everyone happy in all cases.
Even my one 64-bit machine is a 2007 model Dell laptop which I bought secondhand (though barely used) two years ago. To me, that's 'current'!
And it should run Leap just fine. I'm fine with a pretty wide definition of 'current', but I really think 32-bit is a good place to draw the line -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
[snipped lots texts as I basically agree with most of them] On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 14:41:09 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
#5 No contributors have stepped up and started to work with the existing build team to keep 32-bit support.
I think this isn't exactly true. Per (Cc'ed) wrote that he is willing to help, for example. IMO, the problem is that no one responded how to achieve it exactly. And this needs some helping hands from the people who have a deep knowledge about image building. Here is a gap, I'm afraid. thanks, Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 8 September 2015 at 15:00, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
[snipped lots texts as I basically agree with most of them]
On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 14:41:09 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
#5 No contributors have stepped up and started to work with the existing build team to keep 32-bit support.
I think this isn't exactly true. Per (Cc'ed) wrote that he is willing to help, for example.
IMO, the problem is that no one responded how to achieve it exactly. And this needs some helping hands from the people who have a deep knowledge about image building. Here is a gap, I'm afraid.
I was under the impression that I pointed him in the direction of Coolo, DimStar, and Max and the opensuse-factory IRC channel, and as far as I know, he hasn't' taken that suggestion so far -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 15:02:00 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
On 8 September 2015 at 15:00, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
[snipped lots texts as I basically agree with most of them]
On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 14:41:09 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
#5 No contributors have stepped up and started to work with the existing build team to keep 32-bit support.
I think this isn't exactly true. Per (Cc'ed) wrote that he is willing to help, for example.
IMO, the problem is that no one responded how to achieve it exactly. And this needs some helping hands from the people who have a deep knowledge about image building. Here is a gap, I'm afraid.
I was under the impression that I pointed him in the direction of Coolo, DimStar, and Max and the opensuse-factory IRC channel, and as far as I know, he hasn't' taken that suggestion so far
Even if he didn't try it yet: any reason to keep the recipe so secret? That is, if any other people stands up, he/she needs to do this same procedure from the beginning again? If there were *any* documentation, you can just point to it... Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 8 September 2015 at 15:08, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
I was under the impression that I pointed him in the direction of Coolo, DimStar, and Max and the opensuse-factory IRC channel, and as far as I know, he hasn't' taken that suggestion so far
Even if he didn't try it yet: any reason to keep the recipe so secret? That is, if any other people stands up, he/she needs to do this same procedure from the beginning again? If there were *any* documentation, you can just point to it...
Takashi
This is a non-trivial topic - akin to someone asking 'how do I develop my own branch of the linux kernel' Documentation that I would assume Per would need to be fully comfortable with would include https://doc.opensuse.org/projects/kiwi/doc/ https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines https://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Packaging https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Build_Service_Tips_and_Tricks https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Build_Service_Tutorial https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Factory_development_model But, rather than bombard him with a huge pile of learning that would take him a long time, I do think the quickest way of Per to start is by speaking to the people who currently do it. He's more likely to get help that way rather than general emails in long threads which are more likely to get lost. Other suggestions would be to do stuff like maintaining a major project in OBS before hand (eg. something of the size of GNOME or KDE) especially one that produces it's own disk images (like GNOME does) - but those are also not quick solutions.. Regards, Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 15:17:14 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
On 8 September 2015 at 15:08, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
I was under the impression that I pointed him in the direction of Coolo, DimStar, and Max and the opensuse-factory IRC channel, and as far as I know, he hasn't' taken that suggestion so far
Even if he didn't try it yet: any reason to keep the recipe so secret? That is, if any other people stands up, he/she needs to do this same procedure from the beginning again? If there were *any* documentation, you can just point to it...
Takashi
This is a non-trivial topic - akin to someone asking 'how do I develop my own branch of the linux kernel'
Documentation that I would assume Per would need to be fully comfortable with would include
https://doc.opensuse.org/projects/kiwi/doc/
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines https://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Packaging
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Build_Service_Tips_and_Tricks https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Build_Service_Tutorial
Thanks. This is already useful information.
But, rather than bombard him with a huge pile of learning that would take him a long time, I do think the quickest way of Per to start is by speaking to the people who currently do it. He's more likely to get help that way rather than general emails in long threads which are more likely to get lost.
I understand it, but the transparency and knowledge sharing are important factors for the whole process, OTOH, too.
Other suggestions would be to do stuff like maintaining a major project in OBS before hand (eg. something of the size of GNOME or KDE) especially one that produces it's own disk images (like GNOME does) - but those are also not quick solutions..
One of my concerns so far is that the lack of documentation in this area. We seem to have lots of KIWI documents and package documents. But do we have any document about managing _product target? In other words, if we consider "move i586 image to Ports" as a viable option, the guidance "how to add an architecture to Ports" would be the exactly required knowledge. thanks, Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 8 September 2015 at 15:36, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
One of my concerns so far is that the lack of documentation in this area. We seem to have lots of KIWI documents and package documents. But do we have any document about managing _product target?
In other words, if we consider "move i586 image to Ports" as a viable option, the guidance "how to add an architecture to Ports" would be the exactly required knowledge.
I think this is probably a secondary concern, to be addressed once we have 32-bit Leap media, which is something which could be created in someone's OBS home repo using the knowledge contained in the documentation listed above In my inexperienced opinion, the starting point, the core work, is putting the distribution together, compiling it, producing images, and making sure it works.. once that's all done, then we can start worrying about how to move images into Ports and integrating it with the rest of the distribution. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown wrote:
On 8 September 2015 at 15:36, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
One of my concerns so far is that the lack of documentation in this area. We seem to have lots of KIWI documents and package documents. But do we have any document about managing _product target?
In other words, if we consider "move i586 image to Ports" as a viable option, the guidance "how to add an architecture to Ports" would be the exactly required knowledge.
I think this is probably a secondary concern, to be addressed once we have 32-bit Leap media, which is something which could be created in someone's OBS home repo using the knowledge contained in the documentation listed above
Yes, that must be the starting point. I guess I'll give it a try. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (20.0°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown wrote:
On 8 September 2015 at 15:00, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
[snipped lots texts as I basically agree with most of them]
On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 14:41:09 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
#5 No contributors have stepped up and started to work with the existing build team to keep 32-bit support. I think this isn't exactly true. Per (Cc'ed) wrote that he is willing to help, for example.
IMO, the problem is that no one responded how to achieve it exactly. And this needs some helping hands from the people who have a deep knowledge about image building. Here is a gap, I'm afraid.
I was under the impression that I pointed him in the direction of Coolo, DimStar, and Max and the opensuse-factory IRC channel, and as far as I know, he hasn't' taken that suggestion so far
I did already back in June, but have not heard anything back since then. /Per -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 8 September 2015 at 15:26, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
I did already back in June, but have not heard anything back since then.
Tenacity is an attribute that I'd probably consider mandatory for a release engineer of a 32-bit distribution - if you expect people to reply after only one attempt, you're probably going to have a hard time getting developers to pay attention when you need them to fix 32-bit architecture specific bugs So I'd recommend trying a little harder - like I said, IRC might be a good place to find them, they're almost certainly in the #opensuse-factory channel during Chinese/European business hours.. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown wrote:
On 8 September 2015 at 15:26, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
I did already back in June, but have not heard anything back since then.
Tenacity is an attribute that I'd probably consider mandatory for a release engineer of a 32-bit distribution - if you expect people to reply after only one attempt,
Robert Schweikert even wrote a nice introduction at the time, but was apparently also ignored. Given that we/openSUSE often complains of a lack of help ... well, I'm sure you can finish the sentence for me.
you're probably going to have a hard time getting developers to pay attention when you need them to fix 32-bit architecture specific bugs
I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.7°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2015-09-08 at 15:26 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Richard Brown wrote:
On 8 September 2015 at 15:00, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
[snipped lots texts as I basically agree with most of them]
On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 14:41:09 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
#5 No contributors have stepped up and started to work with the existing build team to keep 32-bit support. I think this isn't exactly true. Per (Cc'ed) wrote that he is willing to help, for example.
IMO, the problem is that no one responded how to achieve it exactly. And this needs some helping hands from the people who have a deep knowledge about image building. Here is a gap, I'm afraid.
I was under the impression that I pointed him in the direction of Coolo, DimStar, and Max and the opensuse-factory IRC channel, and as far as I know, he hasn't' taken that suggestion so far
I did already back in June, but have not heard anything back since then.
Per, the latest mail I received from you on that topic was:
Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
Robert,
I'd say a good starting point for Per is to have a look at the Gantt Diagram used for the 13.2 release:
https://progress.opensuse.org/projects/opensuse-13-2 -release/issues/gantt
I did have a look at the todolist when Stephan posted the link in May:
http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-project/2015-05/msg00177.html>
I saw 118 actions and I wanted to go through and see which ones I
a) thought myself qualified for and b) had the necessary info & insight for.
I have not yet done that.
As at that time, you did not have done it 'YET', it was a common assumption that you would start doing it and approach us with more question on the topic. It seems that you'd expected us to hold your hand while you go through the list? Or should we have done the work for you? Dominique -- Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger <dimstar@opensuse.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
On Tue, 2015-09-08 at 15:26 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Richard Brown wrote:
On 8 September 2015 at 15:00, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
[snipped lots texts as I basically agree with most of them]
On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 14:41:09 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
#5 No contributors have stepped up and started to work with the existing build team to keep 32-bit support. I think this isn't exactly true. Per (Cc'ed) wrote that he is willing to help, for example.
IMO, the problem is that no one responded how to achieve it exactly. And this needs some helping hands from the people who have a deep knowledge about image building. Here is a gap, I'm afraid.
I was under the impression that I pointed him in the direction of Coolo, DimStar, and Max and the opensuse-factory IRC channel, and as far as I know, he hasn't' taken that suggestion so far
I did already back in June, but have not heard anything back since then.
Per,
the latest mail I received from you on that topic was:
Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
Robert,
I'd say a good starting point for Per is to have a look at the Gantt Diagram used for the 13.2 release:
https://progress.opensuse.org/projects/opensuse-13-2 -release/issues/gantt
I did have a look at the todolist when Stephan posted the link in May:
http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-project/2015-05/msg00177.html>
I saw 118 actions and I wanted to go through and see which ones I
a) thought myself qualified for and b) had the necessary info & insight for.
I have not yet done that.
As at that time, you did not have done it 'YET', it was a common assumption that you would start doing it and approach us with more question on the topic.
I did go through the list, but most of the items had so little information about what & where, that I had no idea where to continue.
It seems that you'd expected us to hold your hand while you go through the list? Or should we have done the work for you?
No need to be condescending. That's definitely not a good way to get started. I think I wrote up some notes on many of the items, I'll dig that out and see if/how we can progress from there. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.6°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-08 14:41 (UTC+0200): ...
#5 No contributors have stepped up and started to work with the existing build team to keep 32-bit support. #6 No one is blocking anyone from working on 32-bit support, but the people previously involved don't want to do it, and some people like me think it's not worth the effort (but that doesn't mean I mind if other people think I'm wrong - I'm equally happy when my opinion is accepted or not as long as openSUSE benefits) ... openSUSE's architecture support reflects the interest of the openSUSE community, and is a result of those contributors working on those architectures. ... There must comes a time that the desire to develop, improve, and move forward must mean that support for the past doesn't bring the benefit of the time, effort, and cost required. ... I don't want to see people leave, but if they really do only have 32-bit capable hardware right now, I'd imagine the cost and effort of upgrading to cheap, maybe even second hand, 64-bit hardware is no more difficult than moving to a different distribution
Obviously, there are emotions to take into account, so such rational options will not be considered by all. Therefore, I'm sure we will loose some people over this. I don't like it, but I accept it's a cost that comes with progress and I really think it's more important we do what is right for the long term sustainability of the Project than burn ourselves out trying to make everyone happy in all cases. ...
Maybe the attrition in openSUSE is attributable to the nature of the users of older hardware, who just want to keep on not fixing what ain't broke. The relatively short/frequent release schedule is a model made for hardware upgraders, just the opposite of old hardware users, who mainly "upgrade" in order to keep supplied with security fixes. Contrast the <1year official cycle with that of Debian. Its Jessie 8.x was released this year with a 3 year initial support period, to be followed by an LTS period extending its life to 5 years. 32 bit remains #2 in its supported arch list. Users of older hardware may also find it more difficult to engage a contributory niche, at least in part because of Wirth's Law. Keeping pace with software evolution necessitates newer, faster hardware. Sticking with old hardware escalates the difficulty, snuffing desire. This is only speculation on my part, but I have to think another reason for relative scarcity of voluntary contributors is a natural result the paid contributor component of the resource pool, those who contribute to openSUSE through their roles WRT SLE development, and bias its decision processes for the benefit of those getting paid for SLE support. As it has been throughout history, some people simply cannot avoid dependance on the charity of others. Apparently critical mass of altruism in the openSUSE resource pool has been depleted beyond recovery, unofficially announced by coolo here: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2015-08/msg00556.html -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/09/15 14:41, Richard Brown wrote:
Hi gumb,
Thanks for your very long email, I dont have time right now to digest it all and address all the points I want to, but I want to snip right through and clear up a few points that stick out.
<snip>
Thanks for taking the time with this considered response.
The facts are pretty simple
#1 openSUSE's 32-bit user base is shrinking, fast #2 The current contributors for building the media want to support 64-bit only, because of Fact #1 #3 There are clearly passionate users who will be impacted by this decision (though they can continue to use openSUSE 13.1 and 13.2 for some years still)
If Evergreen sticks to its original plan (https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Evergreen), 13.1 will be out of support around November next year. I hope it can continue until then - I know the Evergreen resources are small, but November next year is a lot more palatable for putting an upgrade solution in place for a couple of machines than November of this year. As for 13.2, that would normally be out of support come May 2016. So I'm not sure about those passionate users being able to use these for 'some years', unless they're willing to sacrifice network connectivity in the name of security. Another 14 months, perhaps, is all we've got. Actually I'm agreed that if anybody else can help out the Evergreen efforts, continuing to support 13.1 for at least 14 months more, perhaps even longer given the project's stated aim on that page linked above, that could be more efficient than putting efforts into a 32-bit release of Leap 42.1. I think part of what makes this change to 64-bit-only hard to digest is that it has come about as a result of the restructuring of openSUSE which was largely unforeseen at the time of the last 13.2 release. Users were informed that 13.2 was delayed due to the re-engineering within SUSE, as though it were a one-off exception (especially since one of the many inward-looking discussions on openSUSE releases only happened a couple of years ago, where it was decided to stick to the 8-month cycle and drop the .0 release). Many might have thought the following '13.3' release would follow eight or even six months later, in the circumstances. But this new tie-in to SUSE service pack releases has rather forced openSUSE's hand on the 64-bit issue. If things had remained under the original system, when the decision to drop 32-bit were made, it would likely have been announced in advance or even in conjunction with the previous release, a sort of 'note: this will be the last 32-bit version of openSUSE' statement. Instead - and this isn't a criticism of the new system which I think has some merit - we are rapidly approaching the next release and nobody had thought to make users aware that it would be 64-bit only. No conspiracy, no big fault of anybody, but unfortunately users are only now finding out shortly before a release, which has left people still on 32-bit-only little time to prepare.
<snip>
There's no reluctance to just spit it out. I admit to a little bit of a tiredness to repetition - I don't want to repeatedly go into great detail over a topic which has been discussed openly already.
For example, the statistics in question were part of my openSUSE Conference presentation
You can see the slides with the graphics here:
OK. I did watch your presentation at SUSECon months ago but the audio and slideshow were not easy to hear/see. Looking now at slide number 5, I was a bit confused at first until I realized that DVD+Net and Live are not supplementary downloads to the others denoted by architecture. So it looks like x86-64 was in the region of 105,000 downloads for 13.2, with x86 at about 29,000, or around 21.5%.
As a long-time openSUSE user, I've read a good number of articles, comments and threads in previous years from users in developing nations who say they obtain the distro on disc to install on multiple machines in their communities, and that for them high speed phone or internet connections are either unavailable or unaffordable. It would be logical to assume that people in these regions are likely to have a higher-than-average proportion of older and hence 32-bit machines. Are we no longer caring about this part of the userbase? openSUSE is embarking on its second Asia summit. Were it being held in one of the continent's less developed countries, imagine starting off with a keynote where all 32-bit users were asked to raise their hands, and then asked to leave the summit, because they're no longer relevant.
I was at the openSUSE Asia summit - all the hardware I saw used was 64-bit. I think it's actually quite narrow minded to think that developing countries must use ancient obsolete hardware - I think you'll find most of these countries embrace low-cost, but modern, hardware.
Well I know that in many European countries and the US there are organizations abound that cart off thousands of computers and devices to the developing world. They can't *all* be scams! Nonetheless, still a drop in the ocean I guess. I was quite careful however to distinguish in my remarks above that the country hosting the summit wasn't necessarily the same one that would have such older hardware. Neither China nor Taiwan represent the poorest countries in that region. And for those users enthused enough and with the technological prowess to attend such a summit, sure, they will not generally be the ones with the least resources or coming from the more remote or poor regions.
<snip>
Given that one of Linux's long-standing strong selling points has been that it runs very well on older hardware and allows you to keep such machines in use, for the sake of three more years of support for up to 15% of the user base, I think openSUSE should continue to offer 32-bit
But what if openSUSE has no contributors interested in working on it?
Well as far as 32-bit is concerned, it's clearly not a question of if. There are none, bar Per, perhaps.
And also, I continue to struggle with the mindset that somehow openSUSE must continue to find a way of run shiny new latest versions of everything on increasingly old hardware. New versions of openSUSE are an opportunity to provide our users with new technologies, new software, new versions.
There must comes a time that the desire to develop, improve, and move forward must mean that support for the past doesn't bring the benefit of the time, effort, and cost required.
openSUSE has also been about choice. Choice in desktop environments, choice in enterprise/community distro or now rolling release. Choice in configuring it just how you want it, and for whatever you want it for. But the focus of the distro has clearly now shifted. Somebody, in a thread I can no longer find, was just commenting on how openSUSE is now all about servers, cloud deployments, development tools and the like. That would fit in with the thrust of SUSE towards datacenters and software services. But it's a sharp contrast to where the project was at when I picked up my first boxed copy of 8.2 a decade ago. My eyes glazed over as I looked at the details and screenshots on the back of the box detailing the thousands of apps and useful tasks that could be achieved with openSUSE - very much oriented to the 'power desktop user' as well as developers. Even in the 11.x series the promotional material with the trendy guy in his big designer chair was aimed at the professional who wanted an easy life. The current target user seems to now be shifting, even if some people will still want to claim that openSUSE is everything for everybody. It's going more the way of the enterprise, the developer and the system administrator, and that level of choice and support for the desktop user and their stable of older machines is being eroded. You may care to disagree on that. Perhaps Tumbleweed is better suited to the average desktop user, so long as they have plenty of bandwidth, than an enterprisey LTS spin-off.
What would the business case be that I should present to SUSE?
SUSE are more than happy to invest in openSUSE, especially when it also brings benefits to themselves, but in the case of 32-bit support I cannot think of a pitch I could possibly bring to SUSE management that wouldn't be laughable
"Please give us money and/or more hardware so we can support an architecture which you already don't support in your own products, you're never going to support in your products, and we're going to have to absolutely have to stop supporting in a few years anyway at the current rate of decline? Oh and by the way, we currently have no contributors interested in building for this architecture"
But doesn't that exemplify a bigger problem, whereby openSUSE can only expect financial or hardware support if it aligns itself with the needs of SUSE and its enterprise product? If openSUSE is to be wholly independent, it should either get supported no matter what direction it wants to take, or it would have to just cut ties completely with SUSE as its sponsors and go seek funding elsewhere.
I don't want to see people leave, but if they really do only have 32-bit capable hardware right now, I'd imagine the cost and effort of upgrading to cheap, maybe even second hand, 64-bit hardware is no more difficult than moving to a different distribution
Well, in the case of my folks' machine, a reinstall of the root partition with Mint, preservation of /home and a bit of reconfiguration and learning of Mint's system tools, shouldn't cost anything except a few hours or a couple of days of my time. A new or secondhand machine will be at least 150 UK pounds (if we're talking about anything of remotely satisfactory quality on a par with their old but reliable existing machine). So if it really comes down to that, my choice is made. If I could keep them on a stable, updated machine and make that choice in a year from now, I might have had more chance to save up and help them with a new purchase.
Obviously, there are emotions to take into account, so such rational options will not be considered by all. Therefore, I'm sure we will loose some people over this. I don't like it, but I accept it's a cost that comes with progress and I really think it's more important we do what is right for the long term sustainability of the Project than burn ourselves out trying to make everyone happy in all cases.
I'm not against progress, but I can't help feeling openSUSE now has its hands tied on this issue as a consequence of aligning itself with the enterprise LTS base. And it may not be the last time that happens. gumb -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hi again! :) On 8 September 2015 at 22:57, gumb <gumb@linuxmail.org> wrote: <snip>
I think part of what makes this change to 64-bit-only hard to digest is that it has come about as a result of the restructuring of openSUSE which was largely unforeseen at the time of the last 13.2 release. Users were informed that 13.2 was delayed due to the re-engineering within SUSE, as though it were a one-off exception (especially since one of the many inward-looking discussions on openSUSE releases only happened a couple of years ago, where it was decided to stick to the 8-month cycle and drop the .0 release). Many might have thought the following '13.3' release would follow eight or even six months later, in the circumstances. But this new tie-in to SUSE service pack releases has rather forced openSUSE's hand on the 64-bit issue. If things had remained under the original system, when the decision to drop 32-bit were made, it would likely have been announced in advance or even in conjunction with the previous release, a sort of 'note: this will be the last 32-bit version of openSUSE' statement. Instead - and this isn't a criticism of the new system which I think has some merit - we are rapidly approaching the next release and nobody had thought to make users aware that it would be 64-bit only. No conspiracy, no big fault of anybody, but unfortunately users are only now finding out shortly before a release, which has left people still on 32-bit-only little time to prepare.
I dont think we're giving people an 'unfair time to prepare' unless something changes (and I have no reason to think it will) 13.2, the last openSUSE 32-bit release, will be supported for '2 releases plus 2 months' like previous "openSUSE X.Y" releases With leaps new annual 'minor release' model, that will mean it'll still be supported until approximately January 2017, for a total lifespan of 26 months - a pretty good innings as well as in Britain, and at least 14 months of warning for 32-bit users if you ignore everything we've done to date regarding Leap being 64-bit only. With the precipitous decline in 32-bit openSUSE downloads, the amount of actual people who should actually be impacted by the total lack of a supported 32-bit openSUSE release should be pretty small, and I hope by then the benefits of moving to 64-bit would be more obvious than they already should be And yes, I'm purposefully ignoring what might happen with Evergreen, because I am not in a position to know what they're planning more than anyone else here. I think even if they do nothing, the situation for 32-bit openSUSE users is not the end of the world
Well I know that in many European countries and the US there are organizations abound that cart off thousands of computers and devices to the developing world. They can't *all* be scams! Nonetheless, still a drop in the ocean I guess. I was quite careful however to distinguish in my remarks above that the country hosting the summit wasn't necessarily the same one that would have such older hardware. Neither China nor Taiwan represent the poorest countries in that region. And for those users enthused enough and with the technological prowess to attend such a summit, sure, they will not generally be the ones with the least resources or coming from the more remote or poor regions.
That's a fair point, and I want it kept in mind with something I say below.
openSUSE has also been about choice. Choice in desktop environments, choice in enterprise/community distro or now rolling release. Choice in configuring it just how you want it, and for whatever you want it for.
The whole 'Linux is about Choice' thing is a little bit of a mantra that I find..annoying. I understand the appeal of it. Ooh, lots of choices, I'm in control, I can do what I want. It's very empowering But Linux, and subsequently openSUSE, isn't about unlimited choice. The choices that openSUSE can offer are a function of the choices which openSUSE's contributors want to offer Choices for the sake of choices, add complexity Complexity adds work for those contributors Complexity leads to more things breaking Breaking adds even more work for those contributors So, sure, Linux and openSUSE are about choice, but ultimately the 'final' choices are the ones made by those people sending in code, assets, pull requests to git, submit requests to OBS. And they have perfectly valid reasons for wanting to define the scope of choices within certain boundaries - most likely ones which interest them, and address issues which they are passionate about. This isn't a 'contributors are gods, you users must suffer their wrath' speech, but a statement of how the world works, really. If you're a user who wants to more directly influence openSUSE, beyond just providing ideas, feedback, suggestions, then learn to become a contributor. There is no entrance exam. We don't have strict requirements. A desire and ability to do, and a desire and ability to learn, are the two requirements, the rest is pretty much up to you. I'm speaking from experience here - 10 years ago I started in openSUSE 'as a user', not thinking I had any right, way, or capability of contributing (back then it was a lot harder, no OBS, bugzilla locked down, 20 feet of snow for 10 miles barefoot..you get the idea) I started by filing bugs about stuff that pissed me off - and not just filing and forgetting, but when Developers asked me questions backed, I asked more, I questioned why they wanted this information, what was it for, where can I find it, etc.. it was a learning process for me, while also a productive bug fixing one for the developers. And then when I started to know about to mess around a little more, I started submitting changes which were pretty much "Richard setting the defaults he always used himself and forcing them on every other openSUSE user by default". It's a great way of contributing, you learn a lot about the software you're using in the process, and openSUSE ends up with a reputation for being more polished, when in fact, it's just 'setup the way I like it'.. and that also is a point I want remembered when I talk further later in this email.
But the focus of the distro has clearly now shifted. Somebody, in a thread I can no longer find, was just commenting on how openSUSE is now all about servers, cloud deployments, development tools and the like. That would fit in with the thrust of SUSE towards datacenters and software services. But it's a sharp contrast to where the project was at when I picked up my first boxed copy of 8.2 a decade ago. My eyes glazed over as I looked at the details and screenshots on the back of the box detailing the thousands of apps and useful tasks that could be achieved with openSUSE - very much oriented to the 'power desktop user' as well as developers. Even in the 11.x series the promotional material with the trendy guy in his big designer chair was aimed at the professional who wanted an easy life. The current target user seems to now be shifting, even if some people will still want to claim that openSUSE is everything for everybody. It's going more the way of the enterprise, the developer and the system administrator, and that level of choice and support for the desktop user and their stable of older machines is being eroded.
Besides the removal of 32-bit support, Leap has everything for 'typical desktop users' previous openSUSE releases has, just more stable than ever before, with professional maintenance updates for a good chunk of the core operating system.. I'm sorry, that's a win for developers, sysadmins, conservative desktop users..anyone who doesn't necessarily want the latest versions of everything (Tumbleweed hits that niche) and wants an up to date Linux distribution that works. <snip>
But doesn't that exemplify a bigger problem, whereby openSUSE can only expect financial or hardware support if it aligns itself with the needs of SUSE and its enterprise product? If openSUSE is to be wholly independent, it should either get supported no matter what direction it wants to take, or it would have to just cut ties completely with SUSE as its sponsors and go seek funding elsewhere.
openSUSE is independent, we can go to anyone, anywhere, and ask for help, money, support, donations, blah blah.. just look at our conference sponsorships for the last years But for 32-bit, we need several things, mainly Hardware, for testing and building, and Developers, for fixing bugs, testing and building So! lets think outside the box, who besides SUSE can we approach and say "Hey! We're openSUSE and we're interested in continuing 32-bit support for our Linux distribution, and to do that we would like to see if you're able to donate hardware for our build system, and maybe you have developers who would be willing to work on it with us?" Oh..but this is 32-bit Intel we're talking about No ones been making 32-bit Intel machines for years. No/very few developers, realistically, are going to have an interest in expending a great deal of effort on a dying platform. We have no one to turn to. It's not a case of 'openSUSE isn't independent enough' It's a case of 'this is 2015, the world has changed'
I'm not against progress, but I can't help feeling openSUSE now has its hands tied on this issue as a consequence of aligning itself with the enterprise LTS base. And it may not be the last time that happens.
openSUSE's 'hands' are tied by the interest, capability, and activity of our contributors I understand this is a tricky concept for some. Linux, and Open Source software in general, often comes with a lot of baggage, in the sense that it has a bit of a philosophical aspect to it. Free source, Free data, free thinking. All these people, working on something for free, they must be doing it because they're altruistic, charity minded, right? WRONG The altruism motive isn't totally absent, but it is not the prime motivator for many (I'd argue most) open source contributors to get up in the morning and work on open source software There's lots of studies on this, which actually support that statement which, I know to some, will sound somewhat heretical. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292101001246 (nice summary of this on wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_movement#Motivations_of_Programmer... ) The Cathedral and the Bazaar covers this topic very well with it's 19 "lessons", especially #1 "Every good work of software starts by scratching a developer's personal itch." http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/ And I really like sharing this video when this topic comes up, which while not 100% focused on just open source software, really does show a lot about the psychology behind peoples motivations, and how that really works: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc And this is where I want to call back to the two previous points I highlit While openSUSE obviously needs users, should care for them, should address needs that they have, as a project, our bread a butter, our lifeblood, the people who will do things, come up with ideas, put things together, to keep openSUSE moving forward for ourselves and everyone else, are the enthusiastic ones, are the ones who come to conferences, are the ones who involve themselves in discussions like this and work to shape the future of what we're doing. I'm not saying we should just absolutely forget about the others, the silent ones, such as the example of those from remote and poor regions, but if we're not able to talk to them, involve them, engage them, we're not going to have people enthused, capable, and able of addressing their needs. They might get addressed by accident, as a side effect, I hope so, but we have to focus on where the spark is, where people volunteer their time, effort, work, love, energy..because that's how cool new stuff happens. It's how we can produce better products than everyone else. If we forget that, and chase audiences and use cases which don't ignite flame within ourselves, every effort we try in that direction will fail due to lack of interest. It might sound selfish, putting 'I' before 'others', but we're a community of volunteers. It's a collection of "I"'s, individuals, all with their own individual itches, personal thoughts, concepts, motivations, etc. We become a community, by finding the common things which interest us, by finding ways of pulling the disparate stuff together, and collectively building a better thing than we could if we did it alone But ultimately, I argue that deep down we're all just people wanting to build openSUSE and stuff it full of the default settings that as individuals we think are best for everyone else. And that's okay, as long as we communicate, coordinate, work together, and compromise so the final outcome of openSUSE is a collective work which we can all be proud of. And so if you're an openSUSE user who feels that openSUSE is going in a direction you don't like, please, take this opportunity to get involved, and learn how to change it. No ones going to stop you, but by that same token, I think it's unfair for you to expect others to change what they want to do, just because you disagree. That's just a route to a nice cyclic conversation..which is where this email is going to go if I don't end it now Hope this gives people food for thought - Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-09-08 22:57, gumb wrote:
On 08/09/15 14:41, Richard Brown wrote:
But what if openSUSE has no contributors interested in working on it?
Well as far as 32-bit is concerned, it's clearly not a question of if. There are none, bar Per, perhaps.
No, I'm also interested, but I have no idea how to do it, and I'm incapable to find out and learn what is needed on my own. I would need hand holding and training, yes. Realistically, not viable. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXvfJoACgkQja8UbcUWM1wPEgD+KIm8hMFB2gJHzrFj+Iqa1roK D1FmPTvgmOez27BOdsAA/1K5OwB5yhrf78Am/tFl1K4i8pW4aG0BH3mDQ+7cyzGm =yOXF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On September 8, 2015 8:26:02 PM EDT, "Carlos E. R." <robin.listas@telefonica.net> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-09-08 22:57, gumb wrote:
On 08/09/15 14:41, Richard Brown wrote:
But what if openSUSE has no contributors interested in working on it?
Well as far as 32-bit is concerned, it's clearly not a question of if. There are none, bar Per, perhaps.
No, I'm also interested, but I have no idea how to do it, and I'm incapable to find out and learn what is needed on my own. I would need hand holding and training, yes.
Realistically, not viable.
The first step is probably to designate a mailing list for discussion. Maybe opensuse-buildservice? Definitely not -factory. Greg -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 08 of September 2015 22:57:43 gumb wrote:
Well, in the case of my folks' machine, a reinstall of the root partition with Mint, preservation of /home and a bit of reconfiguration and learning of Mint's system tools, shouldn't cost anything except a few hours or a couple of days of my time. A new or secondhand machine will be at least 150 UK pounds (if we're talking about anything of remotely satisfactory quality on a par with their old but reliable existing machine).
Depends on how you value your time. I checked the prices two days ago: for ~140 EUR (including Czech VAT which is one of the higher ones), you can have a motherboard, a two-core 64-bit CPU (with integrated GPU as a bonus) and 8 GB of memory; you can keep the rest of the system and get something that would, performance-wise, beat any common 32-bit machine by far. You might actually get even lower with the price if you are not too picky or decide 4 GB is enough - and I'm still talking about a new components with two years of guarantee etc. Second-hand hardware would be even cheaper. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-09-09 07:04 (UTC+0200):
gumb wrote:
Well, in the case of my folks' machine, a reinstall of the root partition with Mint, preservation of /home and a bit of reconfiguration and learning of Mint's system tools, shouldn't cost anything except a few hours or a couple of days of my time. A new or secondhand machine will be at least 150 UK pounds (if we're talking about anything of remotely satisfactory quality on a par with their old but reliable existing machine).
Depends on how you value your time. I checked the prices two days ago: for ~140 EUR (including Czech VAT which is one of the higher ones), you can have a motherboard, a two-core 64-bit CPU (with integrated GPU as a bonus) and 8 GB of memory; you can keep the rest of the system and get something that would, performance-wise, beat any common 32-bit machine by far.
Improved performance is not unusually a non-issue for single taskers doing email, shopping or social media. I don't know what it's like on the east side of the Atlantic, but here in the west, complete refurb (burned in, tested) 64 bit PCs are widely available off lease for less than the bargain mobo/CPU/RAM packages, and simpler for Joe Average to navigate through. Not every PC case can take a generic motherboard upgrade, and even when it can, the old PS may well fall short of the new hardware's requirements, mechanically and/or electrically. Not every openSUSE user is adept at motherboard swaps, or would even consider attempting such a task. Even when those are not a problem, there's still unique planning typically required if the new hardware is a different class, such as an old P4 being PATA on ICH4, while that new ~140 EUR is almost surely AMD and more surely not Intel and has no PATA port for the old HD and OM drive that were the norm prior to 64 bit CPU proliferation. Some of us oldsters are still using keyboards without equal in the modern world, and require a PS/2 port to use it, or even a DIN5 to PS/2 adapter. Likely at the very least a check on dracut's hostonly setting to see if an initrd rebuild will be required first in order to avoid post-transplant boot halting at an emergency shell explaining how to try to capture rdsosreport.txt but having nothing it can be written to due to absent driver(s). Surely most FOSS users find a new OS installation simpler than a combination heart, lung and brain transplant, and a goodly number of those would opt for a distro switch over hardware surgery or an entirely different machine, regardless of hardware price. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Wednesday 09 of September 2015 02:07:35 Felix Miata wrote:
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-09-09 07:04 (UTC+0200):
gumb wrote:
A new or secondhand machine will be at least 150 UK pounds (if we're talking about anything of remotely satisfactory quality on a par with their old but reliable existing machine).
Depends on how you value your time. I checked the prices two days ago: for ~140 EUR (including Czech VAT which is one of the higher ones), you can have a motherboard, a two-core 64-bit CPU (with integrated GPU as a bonus) and 8 GB of memory; you can keep the rest of the system and get something that would, performance-wise, beat any common 32-bit machine by far.
Improved performance is not unusually a non-issue for single taskers doing email, shopping or social media.
In my experience, users of such systems often think so - but only until they can compare the responses of contemporary desktops on their old hardware with a new one. I intentionally write "hardware" as more memory or SSD replacing traditional HD in most cases help much more than faster CPU (for 2005+ (64-bit) CPU's, that is). An old desktop on an old hardware would be fine - but that's (1) a security risk and (2) hardly relevant for our discussion.
I don't know what it's like on the east side of the Atlantic, but here in the west, complete refurb (burned in, tested) 64 bit PCs are widely available off lease for less than the bargain mobo/CPU/RAM packages, and simpler for Joe Average to navigate through.
Not every PC case can take a generic motherboard upgrade, and even when it can, the old PS may well fall short of the new hardware's requirements, mechanically and/or electrically.
Even better, then. All I wanted to say was that those 150 GBP were not the lower bound. I definitely didn't want make an impression that replacing MB/CPU/RAM is the only option or that it suits everyone. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-09-09 08:33 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata wrote:
Improved performance is not unusually a non-issue for single taskers doing email, shopping or social media.
In my experience, users of such systems often think so - but only until they can compare the responses of contemporary desktops on their old hardware with a new one....
ignorance = bliss :-D -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-09-09 07:04, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Tuesday 08 of September 2015 22:57:43 gumb wrote:
Well, in the case of my folks' machine, a reinstall of the root partition with Mint, preservation of /home and a bit of reconfiguration and learning of Mint's system tools, shouldn't cost anything except a few hours or a couple of days of my time. A new or secondhand machine will be at least 150 UK pounds (if we're talking about anything of remotely satisfactory quality on a par with their old but reliable existing machine).
Depends on how you value your time. I checked the prices two days ago: for ~140 EUR (including Czech VAT which is one of the higher ones), you
It is not a question of valuing the time. It is a question of having the money. Plus, in poor areas 150? may be more than a month's salary. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXwDYsACgkQja8UbcUWM1z8MAD+LgXDbsHwM0khTpEhuIZw0QAb QmKtWWvRZcT8NfsiFBMA/AxdOSON68xCG8Sm0TlbraUqfPVcZITKW2/jXURZEyzJ =1vVC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Wednesday 2015-09-09 12:44, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Depends on how you value your time. I checked the prices two days ago: for ~140 EUR (including Czech VAT which is one of the higher ones), you
It is not a question of valuing the time. It is a question of having the money.
Plus, in poor areas 150? may be more than a month's salary.
And in developed areas, there is the sustainability argument, the antithesis of planned obsolescence :) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 13:05:45 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
And in developed areas, there is the sustainability argument, the antithesis of planned obsolescence :)
Actually, newer systems often have lower power consumption requirements - especially entry-level systems - than older counterparts. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-09-10 02:07, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 13:05:45 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
And in developed areas, there is the sustainability argument, the antithesis of planned obsolescence :)
Actually, newer systems often have lower power consumption requirements - especially entry-level systems - than older counterparts.
Mmm... in those countries, people use very old cars, that drink gas as fast as a storm drain. A new car would use much less, but you have to buy it first. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXw0eAACgkQja8UbcUWM1y4FwD+OqUjuHNU8/PG4MaFDghkbGE+ wkr2OalYHiwmdQKePZ4A/A0kW9tr63QvL1TgrNlCqaovd7dMH2tqqnDTtXIBp7mD =4mar -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Carlos E. R. <robin.listas@telefonica.net> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-09-10 02:07, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 13:05:45 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
And in developed areas, there is the sustainability argument, the antithesis of planned obsolescence :)
Actually, newer systems often have lower power consumption requirements - especially entry-level systems - than older counterparts.
Mmm... in those countries, people use very old cars, that drink gas as fast as a storm drain. A new car would use much less, but you have to buy it first.
It's a little off-topic but in the US we've had cash for clunkers and my utility buys used refrigerators for $50 a piece. Both are government mandated efforts to get old inefficient equipment out of service for the public good. If 10 year old PCs are that inefficient compared to new generations, then retiring them is something that should be done for the public good. Perhaps instead of complaining openSUSE should be applauded for helping the world by eliminating support for old inefficient equipment which consumes more in energy than it is worth. I'm actually somewhat serious. If a legitimate argument can be made that 32-bit hardware is that inefficient compared to low cost current generation equipment then openSUSE's marketing team can surely leverage that somehow. Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Greg Freemyer wrote:
If 10 year old PCs are that inefficient compared to new generations, then retiring them is something that should be done for the public good.
We're definitely off-topic - but we have to define "inefficient" in this context. We've already looked at power consumption a little while ago, and there is no real business case for buying new hardware just for the sake of power savings. (does depend on the cost of electricity where you live). -- Per Jessen, Zürich (14.6°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 02:42:08 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-09-10 02:07, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 13:05:45 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
And in developed areas, there is the sustainability argument, the antithesis of planned obsolescence :)
Actually, newer systems often have lower power consumption requirements - especially entry-level systems - than older counterparts.
Mmm... in those countries, people use very old cars, that drink gas as fast as a storm drain. A new car would use much less, but you have to buy it first.
A car is a lot more expensive than a new PC, but total cost of ownership is an important consideration. Even when I had very little money available, I bought the best system I could afford, with the intention of using it for several years. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/10/2015 07:47 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 02:42:08 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Even when I had very little money available, I bought the best system I could afford, with the intention of using it for several years.
Absolutely! That's what I do. I buy my computers to last a decade at least. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)solutely. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 10 September 2015 at 12:52, Carlos E. R. <robin.listas@telefonica.net> wrote:
On 09/10/2015 07:47 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 02:42:08 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Even when I had very little money available, I bought the best system I could afford, with the intention of using it for several years.
Absolutely! That's what I do. I buy my computers to last a decade at least.
Great! If you're the kind of person willing to spend money in order to run the same hardware for 10 years I know an company who is willing to take your money in exchange for software which each version is built and supported for 10 years (or even longer in some circumstances) They're called SUSE, and they sell SUSE Linux Enterprise. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/10/2015 01:11 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 10 September 2015 at 12:52, Carlos E. R. <> wrote:
Absolutely! That's what I do. I buy my computers to last a decade at least.
Great! If you're the kind of person willing to spend money in order to run the same hardware for 10 years I know an company who is willing to take your money in exchange for software which each version is built and supported for 10 years (or even longer in some circumstances)
They're called SUSE, and they sell SUSE Linux Enterprise.
The money numbers don't agree with your assessment, when one is on a tight budget. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 10 September 2015 at 13:32, Carlos E. R. <robin.listas@telefonica.net> wrote:
The money numbers don't agree with your assessment, when one is on a tight budget.
In which case, you're reliant on the charity of others. And at this point, I'd like to point that openSUSE has never made any promises, statements, or suggestions, regarding a desire or capability to support hardware for lifespans anything like 10 years and I don't know of any Free, Support, Community distribution that does make any such kind of promises There is a rather large disconnect between that kind of expectation and the reality of openSUSE, which until recently supported releases for no longer than 18 months, and each new version made no promises regarding its ability to support the identical hardware to the earlier versions. It is only with Leap expanding that to a situation where a Major version of openSUSE should be supported for 36 months (admittedly with annual minor releases to freshen up software and add hardware support) And so, if you're the kind of person who buys a computer and expects it to work for 10 years, I suggest you either re-evaluate your choice of distribution or operating system, or, preferably, reconsider your expectations and adjust them accordingly Of course, openSUSE wants to support a very broad array of hardware and hardware ages, but to repeat my points from earlier emails, ultimately, as a community of volunteers we're going to support what is interest and relevance to us. And as far as I can see currently, that doesn't include 32-bit anymore. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/10/2015 01:45 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 10 September 2015 at 13:32, Carlos E. R. <> wrote:
The money numbers don't agree with your assessment, when one is on a tight budget.
In which case, you're reliant on the charity of others.
Not charity. On mutual help. Each one contributing in the areas where each one can. There is a difference.
And at this point, I'd like to point that openSUSE has never made any promises, statements, or suggestions, regarding a desire or capability to support hardware for lifespans anything like 10 years
Linux has. Many times. And *SUSE too (over its decades of life). I'd have to dig it out. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Thursday 10 of September 2015 14:04:40 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 09/10/2015 01:45 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 10 September 2015 at 13:32, Carlos E. R. <> wrote:
The money numbers don't agree with your assessment, when one is on a tight budget.
In which case, you're reliant on the charity of others.
Not charity. On mutual help. Each one contributing in the areas where each one can. There is a difference. Mutual help must be voluntary from all participating sides.
And at this point, I'd like to point that openSUSE has never made any promises, statements, or suggestions, regarding a desire or capability to support hardware for lifespans anything like 10 years
Linux has. Many times. And *SUSE too (over its decades of life). I'd have to dig it out. OK, than to it so, unless you want to be accused of committing argumentation fallacies [1]
Regards Martin 1. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof
On 09/10/2015 02:14 PM, Martin Pluskal wrote:
Mutual help must be voluntary from all participating sides.
Absolutely. :-|
OK, than to it so, unless you want to be accused of committing argumentation fallacies [1]
Then do so. I'm certainly not going to peruse decades of mails. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Thursday 10 of September 2015 15:15:59 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 09/10/2015 02:14 PM, Martin Pluskal wrote:
Mutual help must be voluntary from all participating sides.
Absolutely. :-|
OK, than to it so, unless you want to be accused of committing argumentation fallacies [1]
Then do so. I'm certainly not going to peruse decades of mails. No
it is your claim, provide proof or else remain silent https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof M
On 09/10/2015 03:25 PM, Martin Pluskal wrote:
On Thursday 10 of September 2015 15:15:59 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 09/10/2015 02:14 PM, Martin Pluskal wrote:
Mutual help must be voluntary from all participating sides.
Absolutely. :-|
OK, than to it so, unless you want to be accused of committing argumentation fallacies [1]
Then do so. I'm certainly not going to peruse decades of mails. No
it is your claim, provide proof or else remain silent
Yes, it is. You know very well I can't prove it, because I can't possibly remember who said what over two decades and hundreds of peoples. But neither can you prove it is not true. So, no, I will not keep silent. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/10/2015 03:25 PM, Martin Pluskal wrote:
On Thursday 10 of September 2015 15:15:59 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 09/10/2015 02:14 PM, Martin Pluskal wrote:
Mutual help must be voluntary from all participating sides.
Absolutely. :-|
OK, than to it so, unless you want to be accused of committing argumentation fallacies [1]
Then do so. I'm certainly not going to peruse decades of mails.
No
it is your claim, provide proof or else remain silent
Yes, it is. You know very well I can't prove it, because I can't possibly remember who said what over two decades and hundreds of peoples. But neither can you prove it is not true. So, no, I will not keep silent. To quote wikipedia: "When two parties are in a discussion and one affirms a claim that the other disputes, the one who affirms has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate
On Thursday 10 of September 2015 15:56:52 Carlos E. R. wrote: that claim." - I guess that you have difficulties understanding this, but it is not only wrong but I would say ridiculous to make statements and claim them to be true until someone else proves you wrong. Anyway I hope that you don’t expect that your unverifiable claims will influence the future of openSUSE Tumbleweed or Leap. M
On 09/10/2015 04:35 PM, Martin Pluskal wrote:
Anyway I hope that you don’t expect that your unverifiable claims will influence the future of openSUSE Tumbleweed or Leap.
Of course. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015.09.10 07:04, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 09/10/2015 01:45 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 10 September 2015 at 13:32, Carlos E. R. <> wrote:
And at this point, I'd like to point that openSUSE has never made any promises, statements, or suggestions, regarding a desire or capability to support hardware for lifespans anything like 10 years Linux has. Many times. And *SUSE too (over its decades of life). I'd have to dig it out.
Re: Linux has (not *SUSE)... The RHEL/CentOS/Fedora ecosystem has parallels to SUSE/openSUSE Evergreen/openSUSE Tumbleweed. Not the same, but probably more similar than Debian and Debian-based comparisons. https://wiki.centos.org/About/Product I didn't see the release dates on the CentOS Wiki but they can be found on Wikipedia. Note that CentOS 7, released last year, does not offer 32-bit. -- Brian Y. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, On Sep 10 13:11 Richard Brown wrote:
On 10 September 2015 at 12:52, Carlos E. R. <robin.listas@telefonica.net> wrote:
On 09/10/2015 07:47 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
Even when I had very little money available, I bought the best system I could afford, with the intention of using it for several years.
Absolutely! That's what I do. I buy my computers to last a decade at least.
Great! If you're the kind of person willing to spend money in order to run the same hardware for 10 years I know an company who is willing to take your money in exchange for software which each version is built and supported for 10 years (or even longer in some circumstances)
They're called SUSE, and they sell SUSE Linux Enterprise.
If a customer needs support for (10 years old or whatever age) 32-bit hardware, he cannot buy SUSE Linux Enterprise 12 (SLE12). For 32-bit hardware he can only buy SUSE Linux Enterprise 11. Accordingly I think: If an openSUSE user needs support for 32-bit hardware, he cannot get Leap from openSUSE (because Leap is derived from SLE12). For 32-bit hardware he can get 13.1 or 13.2 from openSUSE. If an openSUSE user needs support for a released openSUSE version for a longer time as openSUSE provides, he should get in contact with the Evergreen community project. Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 10 September 2015 at 14:40, Johannes Meixner <jsmeix@suse.de> wrote:
If a customer needs support for (10 years old or whatever age) 32-bit hardware, he cannot buy SUSE Linux Enterprise 12 (SLE12). For 32-bit hardware he can only buy SUSE Linux Enterprise 11.
Accordingly I think: If an openSUSE user needs support for 32-bit hardware, he cannot get Leap from openSUSE (because Leap is derived from SLE12). For 32-bit hardware he can get 13.1 or 13.2 from openSUSE. If an openSUSE user needs support for a released openSUSE version for a longer time as openSUSE provides, he should get in contact with the Evergreen community project.
Kind Regards Johannes Meixner --
The planned support end date for Evergreen 13.1 is November 2016 https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Evergreen The planned support end date for openSUSE 13.2 (assuming Leap 42.2's release in November 2016) is January 2017 For people who want to remain on an openSUSE 32-bit distribution until the last possible moment, I think 13.2 might be a better choice. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 10 September 2015 at 14:40, Johannes Meixner <jsmeix@suse.de> wrote:
If a customer needs support for (10 years old or whatever age) 32-bit hardware, he cannot buy SUSE Linux Enterprise 12 (SLE12). For 32-bit hardware he can only buy SUSE Linux Enterprise 11.
Yes, which is still purchasable, and General support for SLE 11 SP4 is promised until 31 March 2019 https://www.suse.com/lifecycle/ Which is a few years later than both the Evergreen 13.1 and openSUSE 13.2 predicted support end dates -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, On Sep 10 14:46 Richard Brown wrote (excerpt):
General support for SLE 11 SP4 is promised until 31 March 2019 https://www.suse.com/lifecycle/
And for real money we ("we" means SUSE) even sell extended support really until 31 March 2022. He who pays the piper calls the tune ;-) Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-10 14:46 (UTC+0200):
On 10 September 2015 at 14:40, Johannes Meixner <jsmeix@suse.de> wrote:
If a customer needs support for (10 years old or whatever age) 32-bit hardware, he cannot buy SUSE Linux Enterprise 12 (SLE12). For 32-bit hardware he can only buy SUSE Linux Enterprise 11.
Yes, which is still purchasable, and General support for SLE 11 SP4 is promised until 31 March 2019
Debian 8.x got released this year, in 32 bit among others, with 5 year support life. Maybe that's where most of the remaining 32 bit code contributors went?
Which is a few years later than both the Evergreen 13.1 and openSUSE 13.2 predicted support end dates -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/10/2015 06:16 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-10 14:46 (UTC+0200):
Debian 8.x got released this year, in 32 bit among others, with 5 year support life. Maybe that's where most of the remaining 32 bit code contributors went?
Yes, Debian has developers required for 32 bits (and hardware donations). OpenSUSE has not. As simple as that. So we need YOU ! In other words : if you are really interested by 32bits, give help. Dsant, from France -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Dsant composed on 2015-09-10 19:25 (UTC+0200):
In other words : if you are really interested by 32bits, give help.
I've been helping for years, but my help does not and will not include building, packaging or coding. I test, I provide help in forums, I file bugs, I edit wikis, but leave programming to programmers. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
* Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> [09-10-15 13:52]:
Dsant composed on 2015-09-10 19:25 (UTC+0200):
In other words : if you are really interested by 32bits, give help.
I've been helping for years, but my help does not and will not include building, packaging or coding. I test, I provide help in forums, I file bugs, I edit wikis, but leave programming to programmers.
Sounds somewhat like a stand-off. You won't program and no available programmers/builders want to support a 32bit build. What would you suggest as a next step? Or perhaps those expressing interest will get together and come up with a solution. Pounding on those here who have already said they didn't want to doesn't appear to be gaining any ground. Appears subject is *dead* unless a group forms to provide needed steps. So form a group and make plans. Stop the constant threats and harping and become constructive instead of negative. This is directed at *all* those wanting 32bit support, not just Felix. Nothing will happen until the negetivity leaves and construction begins. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-09-10 22:03, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Felix Miata <> [09-10-15 13:52]:
Dsant composed on 2015-09-10 19:25 (UTC+0200):
In other words : if you are really interested by 32bits, give help.
I've been helping for years, but my help does not and will not include building, packaging or coding. I test, I provide help in forums, I file bugs, I edit wikis, but leave programming to programmers.
Sounds somewhat like a stand-off. You won't program and no available programmers/builders want to support a 32bit build.
What would you suggest as a next step?
I would be willing, but I don't have the needed skill set, simple as that. I was an MsDos/Windows developer, I'm not a Linux dev. It would take months, even years, to put me up to speed. Thus my contribution is in other areas. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
* Carlos E. R. <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> [09-10-15 16:13]:
On 2015-09-10 22:03, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Felix Miata <> [09-10-15 13:52]:
Dsant composed on 2015-09-10 19:25 (UTC+0200):
In other words : if you are really interested by 32bits, give help.
I've been helping for years, but my help does not and will not include building, packaging or coding. I test, I provide help in forums, I file bugs, I edit wikis, but leave programming to programmers.
Sounds somewhat like a stand-off. You won't program and no available programmers/builders want to support a 32bit build.
What would you suggest as a next step?
I would be willing, but I don't have the needed skill set, simple as that. I was an MsDos/Windows developer, I'm not a Linux dev. It would take months, even years, to put me up to speed.
Thus my contribution is in other areas.
Maybe your "contribution" will need to be in more areas that "other". Drive people with your concerns toward a goal you seek rather than "Throwing your hands in the air", re: "Thus....". Someone will need to do something besides clabboring here. If not, please let the thread die as even those interested/concerned are not willing or do not see the necessity to do ANYTHING! You are not alone, Carlos. Or are you really alone? Get the program off the ground or give it up! -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Patrick Shanahan composed on 2015-09-10 16:03 (UTC-0400):
You won't program
You make it sound like an affirmative choice. I tried learning programming on multiple occasions when I was younger and much younger. I liked it to a point, but the time it required was prohibitively out of proportion to results, much too much time going in circles, missing connections that exist and seeing connections that do not. My brain just wasn't made for it.
Stop the constant threats and harping and become constructive...
Coolo's cryptic announcement last month made it clear enough Leap won't have a 32 bit version. Given the ample subsequent amplification by Richard, I think everyone here has gotten that by now. Bringing up Debian was meant neither as threat nor unconstructive, just highlighting frustrating reality. Apparently 32 bit contributors still live, just not in the openSUSE universe. The reason why is likely a consequence of relatively frequent releases with relatively short support lives. Most with older equipment probably have been migrating to LTS universes for a long time, more interested in keeping on keeping on and avoiding the disruption of upgrades than things new. So, soon I have to choose between retiring 60%+ of my machines, or switching them to some distro(s) that supports them. Apparently other openSUSE participant-users are faced with a similarly difficult choice. If Carlos and I and people like us have to switch distros, that means either moving contribution focus among multiple distros much differently, meaning (for me, much) less to openSUSE (where my overwhelming focus is now), and (for me, much) more elsewhere, or giving up on openSUSE for all contributory purposes entirely, in order to maintain enough currency to be of use in non-coding, non-packaging contexts. When I install for someone, or suggest what someone install, that I expect will subsequently want or need help from me, the suggestion has to be that with which I have familiarity, regardless of CPU bits. Reduced seeding, advocacy and support are consequent. IOW, attrition breeds attrition, on multiple contribution fronts, not just in the coding and packaging pools. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Thursday, September 10, 2015 05:10:14 PM Felix Miata wrote:
Patrick Shanahan composed on 2015-09-10 16:03 (UTC-0400):
You won't program
You make it sound like an affirmative choice. I tried learning programming on multiple occasions when I was younger and much younger. I liked it to a point, but the time it required was prohibitively out of proportion to results, much too much time going in circles, missing connections that exist and seeing connections that do not. My brain just wasn't made for it.
Stop the constant threats and harping and become constructive...
Coolo's cryptic announcement last month made it clear enough Leap won't have a 32 bit version. Given the ample subsequent amplification by Richard, I think everyone here has gotten that by now.
Bringing up Debian was meant neither as threat nor unconstructive, just highlighting frustrating reality. Apparently 32 bit contributors still live, just not in the openSUSE universe. The reason why is likely a consequence of relatively frequent releases with relatively short support lives. Most with older equipment probably have been migrating to LTS universes for a long time, more interested in keeping on keeping on and avoiding the disruption of upgrades than things new.
So, soon I have to choose between retiring 60%+ of my machines, or switching them to some distro(s) that supports them. Apparently other openSUSE participant-users are faced with a similarly difficult choice. If Carlos and I and people like us have to switch distros, that means either moving contribution focus among multiple distros much differently, meaning (for me, much) less to openSUSE (where my overwhelming focus is now), and (for me, much) more elsewhere, or giving up on openSUSE for all contributory purposes entirely, in order to maintain enough currency to be of use in non-coding, non-packaging contexts. When I install for someone, or suggest what someone install, that I expect will subsequently want or need help from me, the suggestion has to be that with which I have familiarity, regardless of CPU bits. Reduced seeding, advocacy and support are consequent.
IOW, attrition breeds attrition, on multiple contribution fronts, not just in the coding and packaging pools.
This is another threat, done more subtly than others have been. You have at least one more choice than retiring machines or switching them to another distro. There seem to be several people on this list who want support for 32 bit machines. So another choice would be to organize people who are interested and who bring the requisite skills. That would require taking on a project that would benefit more people than just oneself. So, in lieu of being frustrated, someone could take this on. Turn it into something positive. Perhaps any single individual doesn't have what it would take. Certainly there must be some 32 bit openSUSans who understand that complaining _makes no difference_ and that inviting community participation can work wonders. Carl -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Thursday 2015-09-10 02:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-09-10 02:07, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 13:05:45 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
And in developed areas, there is the sustainability argument, the antithesis of planned obsolescence :)
Actually, newer systems often have lower power consumption requirements - especially entry-level systems - than older counterparts.
Mmm... in those countries, people use very old cars, that drink gas as fast as a storm drain. A new car would use much less, but you have to buy it first.
..and then it probably gets stolen from you, too. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 10.09.2015 08:36, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Thursday 2015-09-10 02:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-09-10 02:07, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 13:05:45 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
And in developed areas, there is the sustainability argument, the antithesis of planned obsolescence :)
Actually, newer systems often have lower power consumption requirements - especially entry-level systems - than older counterparts.
Mmm... in those countries, people use very old cars, that drink gas as fast as a storm drain. A new car would use much less, but you have to buy it first.
..and then it probably gets stolen from you, too.
Can we please abstain from discussing politics? You're 100% off topic here. The facts are: 1. People still use old machines and would love to have Leap on it 2. I'm not going to integrate i586 in the release as it's a dead architecture 3. There doesn't seem to be a huge overlap between the people in 1 and those that know how to handle updates and releases Did anyone try to update a i586 installation to Leap using yast? Are we able to cope with the problems arising? Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Stephan Kulow composed on 2015-09-10 09:59 (UTC+0200):
Did anyone try to update a i586 installation to Leap using yast? Are we able to cope with the problems arising?
I thought about trying more than once, but don't remember ever finding any 32 bit leap repos. Maybe there should be an oss with nothing in it except a readme? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 10 September 2015 at 10:16, Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> wrote:
Stephan Kulow composed on 2015-09-10 09:59 (UTC+0200):
Did anyone try to update a i586 installation to Leap using yast? Are we able to cope with the problems arising?
I thought about trying more than once, but don't remember ever finding any 32 bit leap repos. Maybe there should be an oss with nothing in it except a readme? --
There are no 64-bit repos, and Coolo isn't going to make any Coolo is talking about people testing 32-bit to 64-bit upgrades, using the Leap media -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Tried it: 13.2 23 bit to Leap build 0148. It crashes right after clicking ok after resolving dependencies manually in the graphical installer. The graphical installer crashes and I'm in the old school text mode installer, where you can start the rescue system etc. No visible error message. Tried in a virtual machine (virtual box). Once support for 13.2 ends i'll change to an other 32 bit capable distro. Greetings Andreas On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Richard Brown <RBrownCCB@opensuse.org> wrote:
On 10 September 2015 at 10:16, Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> wrote:
Stephan Kulow composed on 2015-09-10 09:59 (UTC+0200):
Did anyone try to update a i586 installation to Leap using yast? Are we able to cope with the problems arising?
I thought about trying more than once, but don't remember ever finding any 32 bit leap repos. Maybe there should be an oss with nothing in it except a readme? --
There are no 64-bit repos, and Coolo isn't going to make any
Coolo is talking about people testing 32-bit to 64-bit upgrades, using the Leap media -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Thursday 10 of September 2015 11:00:17 Andreas Hoffmann wrote:
Tried it: 13.2 23 bit to Leap build 0148. It crashes right after clicking ok after resolving dependencies manually in the graphical installer. The graphical installer crashes and I'm in the old school text mode installer, where you can start the rescue system etc. No visible error message. Tried in a virtual machine (virtual box). Key point of testing is reporting issues, preferably in way which allows interested parties to understand what is going on and thus helps in resolving issues [1]
Once support for 13.2 ends i'll change to an other 32 bit capable distro.
Thanks for sharing this information, all subscribers of this mailing list definitely should be informed about your decision. Regards Martin 1. https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Submitting_bug_reports#Reporting_a_bug
Am Donnerstag, 10. September 2015, 11:00:17 schrieb Andreas Hoffmann:
Tried it: 13.2 23 bit to Leap build 0148. It crashes right after clicking ok after resolving dependencies manually in the graphical installer.
That's a known problem (in Tumbleweed too), and is totally unrelated to the 32bit/64bit upgrade. The crash has been fixed already, but the fixed packages are not in Tumbleweed yet, and neither in Leap Milestone2. See http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=941398 Kind Regards, Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Wolfgang Bauer <wbauer@tmo.at> wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 10. September 2015, 11:00:17 schrieb Andreas Hoffmann:
Tried it: 13.2 23 bit to Leap build 0148. It crashes right after clicking ok after resolving dependencies manually in the graphical installer.
That's a known problem (in Tumbleweed too), and is totally unrelated to the 32bit/64bit upgrade.
Thank you for this information, it sounds great.
The crash has been fixed already, but the fixed packages are not in Tumbleweed yet, and neither in Leap Milestone2.
Where I can find the information when this is going to be fixed in the installation media or the net installer? Does anybody already know when it will happen? Best Regards Andreas -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am Donnerstag, 10. September 2015, 19:43:21 schrieb Andreas Hoffmann:
Where I can find the information when this is going to be fixed in the installation media or the net installer?
Well, a mail that lists all changes is sent to this list whenever a new snapshot is released. Look out for an update to libyui-qt-pkg 2.45.2, it should say: - Fixed crash in conflict resolver dialog: No longer call libzypp function that always returns null pointer (bsc#941398)
Does anybody already know when it will happen?
After the submit request to Factory has been accepted: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/327731 Kind Regards, Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-10 10:47 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata wrote:
Stephan Kulow composed on 2015-09-10 09:59 (UTC+0200):
Did anyone try to update a i586 installation to Leap using yast? Are we able to cope with the problems arising?
I thought about trying more than once, but don't remember ever finding any 32 bit leap repos. Maybe there should be an oss with nothing in it except a readme?
There are no 64-bit repos, and Coolo isn't going to make any
As I noted upthread: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2015-08/msg00556.html
Coolo is talking about people testing 32-bit to 64-bit upgrades, using the Leap media
I didn't remember any such thing being an option. Hence my puzzlement. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 10 September 2015 at 11:00, Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> wrote:
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-10 10:47 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata wrote:
Stephan Kulow composed on 2015-09-10 09:59 (UTC+0200):
Did anyone try to update a i586 installation to Leap using yast? Are we able to cope with the problems arising?
I thought about trying more than once, but don't remember ever finding any 32 bit leap repos. Maybe there should be an oss with nothing in it except a readme?
There are no 64-bit repos, and Coolo isn't going to make any
As I noted upthread: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2015-08/msg00556.html
Yes, well done, you can remember the second email in this monster thread. Congratulations.
Coolo is talking about people testing 32-bit to 64-bit upgrades, using the Leap media
I didn't remember any such thing being an option. Hence my puzzlement.
If it works, it's an option If it doesn't, decent bug reports with actionable information such as yast logs (save_y2logs is your friend) and error messages might make fixing that an option -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-10 10:47 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata wrote:
Stephan Kulow composed on 2015-09-10 09:59 (UTC+0200):
Did anyone try to update a i586 installation to Leap using yast? Are we able to cope with the problems arising?
I thought about trying more than once, but don't remember ever finding any 32 bit leap repos. Maybe there should be an oss with nothing in it except a readme?
There are no 64-bit repos, and Coolo isn't going to make any
Coolo is talking about people testing 32-bit to 64-bit upgrades, using the Leap media
I decided to try an HTTP one from http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/leap/42.1-Current/repo/oss/, but it did its best to prevent me. I selected EXT4 and mount by Volume Label as default options, then tried to select sda14 as / target, which has 32 bit 13.2 on it, and it wouldn't let me specify / as the mount point, claiming already in use. I found no option to specify upgrade rather than new installation along the way into the expert partitioner. Then I noticed it decided without my input that it would be using a 40G freespace as BTRFS /. Once it let me make sda14 into /, it decided to make the very same sda28 freespace into BTRFS /home. So I aborted the whole installation to make sda28 into NTFS and start over with no freespace available. Again I went to expert, and again it decided in advance a BTRFS, this time sda25. Then I remembered https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547703 and https://features.opensuse.org/308150 remain fallow. I could have sworn upgrading this way used to be simpler, an early on checkbox to say upgrade, picking up mount points, etc. from an existing, without me having to remember what options belong in fstab, instead of pretending to go through a fresh installation. When it decided it needed time zone and root password, I decided this in no way could be an upgrade process, and quit. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Felix Miata wrote:
I could have sworn upgrading this way used to be simpler, an early on checkbox to say upgrade, picking up mount points, etc. from an existing, without me having to remember what options belong in fstab, instead of pretending to go through a fresh installation.
An upgrade from 13.2 32-bit to Leap 42 64-bit is probably more like a fresh installation than a simple upgrade. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (11.8°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 08:08:40AM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Felix Miata wrote:
I could have sworn upgrading this way used to be simpler, an early on checkbox to say upgrade, picking up mount points, etc. from an existing, without me having to remember what options belong in fstab, instead of pretending to go through a fresh installation.
An upgrade from 13.2 32-bit to Leap 42 64-bit is probably more like a fresh installation than a simple upgrade.
So is upgrade from 64-bit 13.2 to 64-bit Leap, IMHO. You need to change all repositories, reinstall all packages, regenerate initrd(s) and reinstall the bootloader. All you can keep are config files (most of them, that is) and files which are not part of a package. And all this is the same, whether you change the architecture or not. A substantial difference may be in third party software and software you built yourself. There may be also minor details, e.g. if a config file contains absolute paths to files in /usr/lib that should be changed to /usr/lib64. But as far as the distribution goes, the scope of the upgrade (in the sense of "more like a fresh installation") is about the same. Michal Kubecek -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 11 September 2015 at 03:44, Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> wrote:
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-10 10:47 (UTC+0200):
Coolo is talking about people testing 32-bit to 64-bit upgrades, using the Leap media
I decided to try an HTTP one from http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/leap/42.1-Current/repo/oss/, <snip at the first mistake>
Your ability to over complicate my suggestion is amazing - by going off piste the way you have I consider all of the subsequent findings invalid. To test what I suggest properly. On a 32-bit 13.2 machine, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it Select the Upgrade option https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/82601/modules/bootloader/steps/4 Then see how well things upgrade, or not. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 11/09/2015 10:19, Richard Brown wrote:
To test what I suggest properly.
On a 32-bit 13.2 machine, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it
What?? That's impossible, you can not be suggesting that, really. A 64 bit operating system, any system, will not boot in a 32 bit hardware. -- Saludos/Cheers, Carlos E.R. (Minas-Morgul - W10) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Dne Pá 11. září 2015 12:51:35, Carlos E.R. napsal(a):
On 11/09/2015 10:19, Richard Brown wrote:
To test what I suggest properly.
On a 32-bit 13.2 machine, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it
What??
That's impossible, you can not be suggesting that, really. A 64 bit operating system, any system, will not boot in a 32 bit hardware.
Carlos, The update is to be tested on 64bit HW, which most of the current 32bit users are having anyway. Please already stop posting in this thread and wasting bandwith. Tom
On 11/09/2015 13:02, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
Dne Pá 11. září 2015 12:51:35, Carlos E.R. napsal(a):
On 11/09/2015 10:19, Richard Brown wrote:
To test what I suggest properly.
On a 32-bit 13.2 machine, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it
What??
That's impossible, you can not be suggesting that, really. A 64 bit operating system, any system, will not boot in a 32 bit hardware.
Carlos,
The update is to be tested on 64bit HW, which most of the current 32bit users are having anyway.
Please already stop posting in this thread and wasting bandwith.
Please READ what Richard wrote (emphasis added): "On a *32-bit* 13.2 *machine*, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it" He is not saying what you say. Thus please stop telling people to shut up, and be reasonable, not daft. :-/ If Richard is not meaning 32 bit hardware, then he has to check his writing. -- Saludos/Cheers, Carlos E.R. (Minas-Morgul - W10) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 11 September 2015 at 13:27, Carlos E.R. <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> wrote:
Please READ what Richard wrote (emphasis added):
"On a *32-bit* 13.2 *machine*, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it"
He is not saying what you say.
Thus please stop telling people to shut up, and be reasonable, not daft. :-/
If Richard is not meaning 32 bit hardware, then he has to check his writing.
On a Machine containing a processor with an Intel Architecture x86_64 64-bit Central Processing Unit alongside a hard drive, or solid state disk, containing an installation of the openSUSE Linux Distribution Version 13.2 for the i586 Intel 32-bit architectures, please insert (in either an optical Drive or USB stick) the installation media for the openSUSE Leap Linux distribution, Version 42.1, for the x86_64 Intel 64-bit Intel architecture, and boot to it. Clear enough for you? Notice: Carlos this is the last mail of yours I intend to pay much attention to or reply to for a while, getting tired of this kind of stuff..I'm pretty sure the intent of my original email was obvious. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 11/09/2015 13:33, Richard Brown wrote:
On 11 September 2015 at 13:27, Carlos E.R. <> wrote:
Please READ what Richard wrote (emphasis added):
"On a *32-bit* 13.2 *machine*, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it"
He is not saying what you say.
Thus please stop telling people to shut up, and be reasonable, not daft. :-/
If Richard is not meaning 32 bit hardware, then he has to check his writing.
On a Machine containing a processor with an Intel Architecture x86_64 64-bit Central Processing Unit alongside a hard drive, or solid state disk, containing an installation of the openSUSE Linux Distribution Version 13.2 for the i586 Intel 32-bit architectures, please insert (in either an optical Drive or USB stick) the installation media for the openSUSE Leap Linux distribution, Version 42.1, for the x86_64 Intel 64-bit Intel architecture, and boot to it.
Clear enough for you?
Notice: Carlos this is the last mail of yours I intend to pay much attention to or reply to for a while, getting tired of this kind of stuff..I'm pretty sure the intent of my original email was obvious.
It certainly was not obvious. You said *32-bit* 13.2 *machine*. That means 32 bit hardware, not 32 bit software on 64 bit hardware. It is entirely your fault for not being clear, and you should ask excuses. :-/ Anyway, what you suggest now is exactly what Felix tried, and it failed completely. -- Saludos/Cheers, Carlos E.R. (Minas-Morgul - W10) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 13:44:58 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
It certainly was not obvious. You said *32-bit* 13.2 *machine*. That means 32 bit hardware, not 32 bit software on 64 bit hardware.
I understood it perfectly. Because it's *obvious* you cannot run 64-bit software on a 32-bit processor, he *had* to mean "on 64-bit hardware running 32-bit openSUSE 13.2". But then again, I also don't assume that the person who's writing something is an idiot unless and until proven otherwise. Richard is no idiot. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-09-11 17:54, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 13:44:58 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
It certainly was not obvious. You said *32-bit* 13.2 *machine*. That means 32 bit hardware, not 32 bit software on 64 bit hardware.
I understood it perfectly. Because it's *obvious* you cannot run 64-bit software on a 32-bit processor, he *had* to mean "on 64-bit hardware running 32-bit openSUSE 13.2".
But then again, I also don't assume that the person who's writing something is an idiot unless and until proven otherwise. Richard is no idiot.
I know that, which is why I was so bewildered at what he was saying. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXy/CsACgkQja8UbcUWM1yrkAD+KO843MUYHNV8pW5ZHMdXfOGY O/D2MIIubO1aYxj6VqoA/Ag7oX46iSBb9XszBzMNSTVUuE3Z9zYY2TrOwUtNXiBj =sHqK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:07:07 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-09-11 17:54, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 13:44:58 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
It certainly was not obvious. You said *32-bit* 13.2 *machine*. That means 32 bit hardware, not 32 bit software on 64 bit hardware.
I understood it perfectly. Because it's *obvious* you cannot run 64-bit software on a 32-bit processor, he *had* to mean "on 64-bit hardware running 32-bit openSUSE 13.2".
But then again, I also don't assume that the person who's writing something is an idiot unless and until proven otherwise. Richard is no idiot.
I know that, which is why I was so bewildered at what he was saying.
You need to learn how to understand what people are writing. It's not a difficult thing to understand given all the facts - and these are facts that you know. So, for example, doing a really close parsing of Richard's phrase "32-bit 13.2 machine" - 32-bit is an adjective that modifies "13.2" (which should be clear that he means 'openSUSE 13.2' and not, say, XBMC 13.2. But given your prediliction to finding ways to misinterpret things, I wouldn't be surprised if you were thinking XBMC instead of openSUSE). It doesn't modify "machine". "32-bit [openSUSE] 13.2". "Machine" in this case would be a system that fits the criteria of being capable of running 32-bit openSUSE 13.2 *and* the current milestone of 64-bit openSUSE Leap 42.1. Which is /not/ a 32-bit system - because a 32-bit system cannot run a 64- bit operating system. Like Richard, I'm also getting very tired of your argumentative approach to *every* *single* discussion you participate in, whether it's overparsing a sentence or arguing edge cases that don't apply to the main thrust of a discussion, you always find a way to "contribute" to a discussion, and frequently that contribution is entirely content-free and doesn't help one bit. So, like Richard, I'm also going to take a break from your posts for a while. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-09-11 18:26, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:07:07 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I know that, which is why I was so bewildered at what he was saying.
You need to learn how to understand what people are writing. It's not a difficult thing to understand given all the facts - and these are facts that you know.
So, for example, doing a really close parsing of Richard's phrase "32-bit 13.2 machine" - 32-bit is an adjective that modifies "13.2" (which should be clear that he means 'openSUSE 13.2' and not, say, XBMC 13.2. But given your prediliction to finding ways to misinterpret things, I wouldn't be surprised if you were thinking XBMC instead of openSUSE). It doesn't modify "machine". "32-bit [openSUSE] 13.2". "Machine" in this case would be a system that fits the criteria of being capable of running 32-bit openSUSE 13.2 *and* the current milestone of 64-bit openSUSE Leap 42.1.
Which is /not/ a 32-bit system - because a 32-bit system cannot run a 64- bit operating system.
If that is so, and I'm not convinced yet (I'm not English, after all), I misinterpreted things, and I'm sorry. However, he was blaming Felix for not doing the upgrade right, when in fact he was. The full context: RB> Your ability to over complicate my suggestion is amazing - by going RB> off piste the way you have I consider all of the subsequent findings RB> invalid. RB> RB> To test what I suggest properly. RB> RB> On a 32-bit 13.2 machine, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it RB> RB> Select the Upgrade option
Like Richard, I'm also getting very tired of your argumentative approach to *every* *single* discussion you participate in, whether it's overparsing a sentence or arguing edge cases that don't apply to the main thrust of a discussion, you always find a way to "contribute" to a discussion, and frequently that contribution is entirely content-free and doesn't help one bit.
So, like Richard, I'm also going to take a break from your posts for a while.
And I'm getting tired that you find fault with anything that I say, just because its me who says it. Maybe I have to break away from your posts for a while. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXzGs8ACgkQja8UbcUWM1wqIQD/fbP2aiqSd7VNdyvDF6CJsmWH kv2MGodcj5s+1wF1rDMBAIgOtaOnyRyel4VsxDZY6WQpUi/7viA4/+/mdQ9850ZR =C0DD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 20:17:51 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
And I'm getting tired that you find fault with anything that I say, just because its me who says it. Maybe I have to break away from your posts for a while.
One final comment. Leave moderating and dealing with user issues on the forums to forums staff. You make extra work for forum staff when you reply to someone who's gotten pissed off and we've already dealt with the issues. Your intervention in forum administration/moderation is not needed nor wanted. Take a break from the forums while you're taking a break from my posts. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Op vrijdag 11 september 2015 13:27:27 schreef Carlos E.R.:
On 11/09/2015 13:02, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
Dne Pá 11. září 2015 12:51:35, Carlos E.R. napsal(a):
On 11/09/2015 10:19, Richard Brown wrote:
To test what I suggest properly.
On a 32-bit 13.2 machine, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it
What??
That's impossible, you can not be suggesting that, really. A 64 bit operating system, any system, will not boot in a 32 bit hardware.
Carlos,
The update is to be tested on 64bit HW, which most of the current 32bit users are having anyway.
Please already stop posting in this thread and wasting bandwith.
Please READ what Richard wrote (emphasis added):
"On a *32-bit* 13.2 *machine*, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it"
He is not saying what you say.
Thus please stop telling people to shut up, and be reasonable, not daft. :-/
If Richard is not meaning 32 bit hardware, then he has to check his writing.
Please stop this, Carlos. We know you're capable of misreading anything, no need to expose that in every single post. -- Gertjan Lettink, a.k.a. Knurpht Official openSUSE Member openSUSE Forums Team -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 11/09/2015 13:46, Knurpht - Gertjan Lettink wrote:
Op vrijdag 11 september 2015 13:27:27 schreef Carlos E.R.:
Please stop this, Carlos. We know you're capable of misreading anything, no need to expose that in every single post.
Please stop pointing fingers at me. Richard blamed me, instead of just saying "oh, sorry for the misunderstanding, fast fingers", which would be fast and correct. He also blamed Felix for not doing it right, when Felix did try exactly what he is suggesting to try: update 64 bit hardware with 32 bit Linux to 64 bit Linux. He said that Felix was doing it wrong, which is why I said "no". -- Saludos/Cheers, Carlos E.R. (Minas-Morgul - W10) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Op vrijdag 11 september 2015 12:51:35 schreef Carlos E.R.:
On 11/09/2015 10:19, Richard Brown wrote:
To test what I suggest properly.
On a 32-bit 13.2 machine, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it
What??
That's impossible, you can not be suggesting that, really. A 64 bit operating system, any system, will not boot in a 32 bit hardware.
This is a mailing list, not the World Championchips for Misunderstanding Potentially Anything -- Gertjan Lettink, a.k.a. Knurpht Official openSUSE Member openSUSE Forums Team -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Knurpht - Gertjan Lettink <knurpht@opensuse.org> schreef op 11 september 2015 13:39:48 CEST:
Op vrijdag 11 september 2015 12:51:35 schreef Carlos E.R.:
On 11/09/2015 10:19, Richard Brown wrote:
To test what I suggest properly.
On a 32-bit 13.2 machine, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it
What??
That's impossible, you can not be suggesting that, really. A 64 bit operating system, any system, will not boot in a 32 bit hardware.
This is a mailing list, not the World Championchips for Misunderstanding Potentially Anything
Will never work... ---------------------------------------------------------------- Verstuurd vanaf mijn Android apparaat... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-11 10:19 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata wrote:
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-10 10:47 (UTC+0200):
Coolo is talking about people testing 32-bit to 64-bit upgrades, using the Leap media
I decided to try an HTTP one from http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/leap/42.1-Current/repo/oss/,
<snip at the first mistake>
What exactly was "first mistake"?
Your ability to over complicate my suggestion is amazing - by going off piste the way you have I consider all of the subsequent findings invalid.
I don't know what "going off piste" means.
To test what I suggest properly.
On a 32-bit 13.2 machine, put in a 64-bit Leap media and boot to it
Different strokes for different folks. Removable media is a PITA I choose to routinely avoid, especially for one-use cases like pre-release operating systems. Removable media is non-free, and a much bigger nuisance to library than Grub menu files. Instead...
Select the Upgrade option
I added Upgrade=1 to Grub cmdline. Eventually it finished evaluating "root" partition, though root partition count on the machine is actully 6, and gave 3 to choose from. None of those 3 were the desired 32 bit target, so I selected show all, and selected the i586 13.2 partition, whereupon it announced "The architecture of the system instealled in the selected partition is different from the one of this product." Next it complained some devices are mounted by name. It shouldn't matter in this case, because the only partitions mounted by device name are non-native types on which boot success does not depend. Native partitions here are mounted by LABEL. Next it announced removal of more repositories than were configured, more than what fits a 900px tall screen without scrolling by rougly 25%. Upgrade installation process is apparently counting every uri-containing file in /etc/zypp/repos.d/ rather than those with filenames ending in .repo that actually get used by zypp/yast. Actual valid *.repo file count is 9, plus repo-update-non-oss.repo which is zero bytes. The in place "backup", files normally ignored by zypp/yast, file count is 37. Next it announced no repositories were defined, even though this was included in /proc/cmdline output: install=http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/leap/42.1-Current/repo/oss/ That URL is exactly the same as from which I downloaded the installation linux and initrd, and surely the same as from which it found the 6 installation files that got it to this point. Next screen was installation summary, where conspicuously present was replacement of grub-0.97-194.1.2.i586 (from 13.1, as that from 13.2 is broken: BOO 918028) on / partition with with Grub2 on sda4, with the apparently contradictory but otherwise OK do not install bootcode into MBR or / partition. "Cannot resolve all conflicts. Manual Intervention is required." Packages to update: 844. New to install: 483. To remove: 61. I proceeded into resolution, clicked on a few remove locks, then OK, and the GUI crashed, leaving the framebuffer announcing an error occurred during the installation. I saved the logs, then gave up: http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/SUSE/Factory/GX780-y2leap/ Maybe crash is https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=941398 and I can try again when fix shows up on mirrors?
https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/82601/modules/bootloader/steps/4
Then see how well things upgrade, or not. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday, September 11, 2015 02:41:48 PM Felix Miata wrote:
I don't know what "going off piste" means.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=off+piste -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Carl Symons composed on 2015-09-11 11:54 (UTC-0700):
Felix Miata wrote:
I don't know what "going off piste" means.
It looked like some sort of typo. I've lived most of my life in a climate where skiing is rarely a topic of conversation, never seen the term before, and the context of Richard's use provided no clues. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, even if you found some road bumps, your mail sounds promising for arch- changing upgrades. Am Freitag, 11. September 2015 schrieb Felix Miata:
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-11 10:19 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata wrote:
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-10 10:47 (UTC+0200):
Coolo is talking about people testing 32-bit to 64-bit upgrades, using the Leap media
I decided to try an HTTP one from http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/leap/42.1-Current/repo/os s/,> <snip at the first mistake>
What exactly was "first mistake"?
I'd _guess_ Richard means using a way that is (probably) rarely used - while this is fine in general, it might bring in some additional unknown issues to an already interesting[tm] question. That said - from your description I'd say you know what you are doing ;-) so using the network install way shouldn't be a big problem here.
Select the Upgrade option
I added Upgrade=1 to Grub cmdline. Eventually it finished evaluating "root" partition, though root partition count on the machine is actully 6, and gave 3 to choose from. None of those 3 were the desired 32 bit target, so I selected show all, and selected the i586
The 3 shown partitions contained 64 bit openSUSE systems, right? The installer only lists root partitions with the same architecture by default (unless you select "show all"), so this sounds correct.
13.2 partition, whereupon it announced "The architecture of the system instealled in the selected partition is different from the one of this product."
Next it complained some devices are mounted by name. It shouldn't matter in this case, because the only partitions mounted by device name are non-native types on which boot success does not depend. Native partitions here are mounted by LABEL.
It's just a warning ;-) (= "not an error" *g*)
Next it announced removal of more repositories than were configured, more than what fits a 900px tall screen without scrolling by rougly 25%. Upgrade installation process is apparently counting every uri-containing file in /etc/zypp/repos.d/ rather than those with filenames ending in .repo that actually get used by zypp/yast. Actual valid *.repo file count is 9, plus repo-update-non-oss.repo which is zero bytes. The in place "backup", files normally ignored by zypp/yast, file count is 37.
Please open a bugreport for that and attach the YaST logs.
Next it announced no repositories were defined, even though this was included in /proc/cmdline output:
install=http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/leap/42.1-Current/re po/oss/
That's probably worth another bugreport (including the YaST logs again).
Next screen was installation summary, where conspicuously present was replacement of grub-0.97-194.1.2.i586 (from 13.1, as that from 13.2 is broken: BOO 918028) on / partition with with Grub2 on sda4, with the apparently contradictory but otherwise OK do not install bootcode into MBR or / partition.
"Cannot resolve all conflicts. Manual Intervention is required." Packages to update: 844. New to install: 483. To remove: 61. I
I'm a bit surprised by the large number of new packages (was the old system installed without recommends?), but in general this looks good and promising.
proceeded into resolution, clicked on a few remove locks, then OK, and the GUI crashed, leaving the framebuffer announcing an error occurred during the installation. I saved the logs, then gave up:
http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/SUSE/Factory/GX780-y2leap/
Maybe crash is https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=941398 and I can try again when fix shows up on mirrors?
Yes, that sounds like this bug. Please try again when fixed installation repos are available - my guess is that the arch-changing upgrade should work. Regards, Christian Boltz --
Und nun rate mal, warum ausgerechnet v.a. Vielschreiber mutt verwenden. Sicher nicht, weil KMail besser waere. Weil eine Handvoll muttschisten die alle dazu gezwungen hat? ;) [> David Haller und Manfred Misch in suse-linux]
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/13/2015 09:09 AM, Christian Boltz wrote:
Hello,
even if you found some road bumps, your mail sounds promising for arch- changing upgrades.
Am Freitag, 11. September 2015 schrieb Felix Miata:
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-11 10:19 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata wrote:
Richard Brown composed on 2015-09-10 10:47 (UTC+0200):
Coolo is talking about people testing 32-bit to 64-bit upgrades, using the Leap media
I decided to try an HTTP one from http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/leap/42.1-Current/repo/os s/,> <snip at the first mistake>
What exactly was "first mistake"?
I'd _guess_ Richard means using a way that is (probably) rarely used - while this is fine in general, it might bring in some additional unknown issues to an already interesting[tm] question.
That said - from your description I'd say you know what you are doing ;-) so using the network install way shouldn't be a big problem here.
Select the Upgrade option
I added Upgrade=1 to Grub cmdline. Eventually it finished evaluating "root" partition, though root partition count on the machine is actully 6, and gave 3 to choose from. None of those 3 were the desired 32 bit target, so I selected show all, and selected the i586
The 3 shown partitions contained 64 bit openSUSE systems, right? The installer only lists root partitions with the same architecture by default (unless you select "show all"), so this sounds correct.
13.2 partition, whereupon it announced "The architecture of the system instealled in the selected partition is different from the one of this product."
Next it complained some devices are mounted by name. It shouldn't matter in this case, because the only partitions mounted by device name are non-native types on which boot success does not depend. Native partitions here are mounted by LABEL.
It's just a warning ;-) (= "not an error" *g*)
Next it announced removal of more repositories than were configured, more than what fits a 900px tall screen without scrolling by rougly 25%. Upgrade installation process is apparently counting every uri-containing file in /etc/zypp/repos.d/ rather than those with filenames ending in .repo that actually get used by zypp/yast. Actual valid *.repo file count is 9, plus repo-update-non-oss.repo which is zero bytes. The in place "backup", files normally ignored by zypp/yast, file count is 37.
Please open a bugreport for that and attach the YaST logs.
Next it announced no repositories were defined, even though this was included in /proc/cmdline output:
install=http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/leap/42.1-Current/re po/oss/
That's probably worth another bugreport (including the YaST logs again).
Next screen was installation summary, where conspicuously present was replacement of grub-0.97-194.1.2.i586 (from 13.1, as that from 13.2 is broken: BOO 918028) on / partition with with Grub2 on sda4, with the apparently contradictory but otherwise OK do not install bootcode into MBR or / partition.
"Cannot resolve all conflicts. Manual Intervention is required." Packages to update: 844. New to install: 483. To remove: 61. I
I'm a bit surprised by the large number of new packages (was the old system installed without recommends?), but in general this looks good and promising.
proceeded into resolution, clicked on a few remove locks, then OK, and the GUI crashed, leaving the framebuffer announcing an error occurred during the installation. I saved the logs, then gave up:
http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/SUSE/Factory/GX780-y2leap/
Maybe crash is https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=941398 and I can try again when fix shows up on mirrors?
Yes, that sounds like this bug.
Please try again when fixed installation repos are available - my guess is that the arch-changing upgrade should work.
Regards,
Christian Boltz
Christian, When running the Yast2 Software Manager, navigate to "Options". Compared to openSUSE 13.2, notice that the option: _"Ignore Recommended Packages for Already Installed Packages"_ has been removed. It is no longer available. Cheers! Roman IRC: 551368250 ============== -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Christian Boltz composed on 2015-09-13 15:09 (UTC+0200):
even if you found some road bumps, your mail sounds promising for arch- changing upgrades.
Felix Miata composed:
"Cannot resolve all conflicts. Manual Intervention is required." Packages to update: 844. New to install: 483. To remove: 61. I
I'm a bit surprised by the large number of new packages (was the old system installed without recommends?), but in general this looks good and promising.
Now that updated yui packages finally hit the mirrors I tried again. This time: 845 to update 430 new to install 100 to remove First resolver try, prior to package selection, was all about telling it to go ahead and replace three instances of 686 kernel with x86_64 kernel, 3.16.7-7, 3.16.7-21 & 3.16.7-24. No small number of "new" packages to install are the -32-bit variety. Other than those cups and samba and their related requires, most seem suspect to me. (After seeing the first installation proposal, I aborted, zypper rm'd seamonkey, firefox and *trinity* packages, and thought I zypper installed kde3/kdm3 before starting current upgrade attempt...) I added a taboo on libjpeg8-32bit, and far too many checkmarks to count were removed. Another puzzler is why so many previously unneeded -lang packages are selected. Only the en base lang is ever used here. After package deselections: 843 to update 246 new to install 113 to remove 1089 initial performing upgrade counter Freespace on upgrade target prior to proceeding: 2944857 blocks/46%. after: 3010292/44. O_O I guess most of that is likely due to 1 kernel replacing 3. Oops. Apparently kde3 got removed. Errors noted during package installation: netcfg doesn't like my hardlinked /etc/hostname/HOSTNAME arts generated some kind of mv failure Malachite boots, from "upgraded" Grub Legacy. :-) Installed -32bit package count: 12 Trinity for 13.2 won't install due to missing trinity-libpoppler-tqt, libtqt3-mt, etc. Trying to install kdebase3-kdm kdebase3 session kdebase3-workspace kdebase3-runtime kdeadmin3 kdeutils3 kdemultimedia3 fail due to lock preventing installation of kdm-4.11.2, which if allowed to proceed would install no kde3 packages and 38 kde4/qt4 packages and their deps. Trying same after enabling http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/KDE:/KDE3/ fails due to missing udisks-glue. This was not an upgrade. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 02:42:08AM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-09-10 02:07, Jim Henderson wrote:
Actually, newer systems often have lower power consumption requirements - especially entry-level systems - than older counterparts.
Mmm... in those countries, people use very old cars, that drink gas as fast as a storm drain. A new car would use much less, but you have to buy it first.
Sounds like a problem similar to (even if not the same as) Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness: http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/72745-the-reason-that-the-rich-were-so-rich-... Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/11/2015 09:45 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/72745-the-reason-that-the-rich-were-so-rich-...
That's a nice quote - it's similar to grandpa's saying: "Mia san z'arm ois dass ma uns a Glump leist'n kannt'n". (Bavarian) "we're too poor to buy cheap crap" (English translation) Have a nice day, Berny -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 11/09/2015 9:45, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 02:42:08AM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Mmm... in those countries, people use very old cars, that drink gas as fast as a storm drain. A new car would use much less, but you have to buy it first.
Sounds like a problem similar to (even if not the same as) Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness:
Didn't know it, but it is true. Reminds me of a movie; I don't remember the tittle. Some rich people give someone a million, dollars or pounds, I don't remember. But he can not spend any of it for a month. That's the bet. And he manages... he buys suits at the tailor, food at expensive restaurants, without expending a penny. Or cent. -- Saludos/Cheers, Carlos E.R. (Minas-Morgul - W10) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Friday, September 11, 2015 12:57:32 PM Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 11/09/2015 9:45, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 02:42:08AM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Mmm... in those countries, people use very old cars, that drink gas as fast as a storm drain. A new car would use much less, but you have to buy it first.
Sounds like a problem similar to (even if not the same as) Captain
Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness: Didn't know it, but it is true.
Reminds me of a movie; I don't remember the tittle. Some rich people give someone a million, dollars or pounds, I don't remember. But he can not spend any of it for a month. That's the bet. And he manages... he buys suits at the tailor, food at expensive restaurants, without expending a penny. Or cent.
Maybe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Million_Pound_Bank_Note -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/08/2015 02:13 PM, gumb wrote:
An HP laptop computer ...............
- thanks for a most interesting , and, entertaining post. .............. regards -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-09-07 08:20 (UTC+0200):
I believe most current i586 openSUSE users do not use this architecture out of necessity.
I have 15 machines with one or more TW installations and 32 bit CPUs. Two include at least one of every openSUSE release but possibly one or two (from the 10.x/11.x period). Leap cannot be installed on any of them. I have 11 machines with one or more TW installations and 64 bit CPUs. Most have no more than 2G RAM. About half the installations are running 32 bit, typically on 4.8G / partitions, which are up to 95% full. Those running 64 are on / partitions larger than 4.8G. "Upgrading" to 64 bit would mean need to remove software in order to fit required 32 bit compat packages not currently required on those now running 32 bit. All the above are multiboot machines. Each shares one /usr/local among all distro installations, Fedora, Mageia, Debian, Kubuntu and/or a smattering of others, but overwhelmingly openSUSE. The binaries in each's /usr/local are matched to the installations, without room to unqualifiedly add duplicates by arch, so either they have 32 bit to match the installations, or likewise 64. How do these, and I, fit into your definition of "necessity"? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Monday 07 of September 2015 03:47:06 Felix Miata wrote:
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-09-07 08:20 (UTC+0200):
I believe most current i586 openSUSE users do not use this architecture out of necessity.
I have 15 machines with one or more TW installations and 32 bit CPUs. ... I have 11 machines with one or more TW installations and 64 bit CPUs. ... How do these, and I, fit into your definition of "necessity"?
How do you or your 26 machines fit into your definition of "most"? :-) Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-09-07 09:55 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata wrote:
Michal Kubecek composed on 2015-09-07 08:20 (UTC+0200):
I believe most current i586 openSUSE users do not use this architecture out of necessity.
I have 15 machines with one or more TW installations and 32 bit CPUs. ... I have 11 machines with one or more TW installations and 64 bit CPUs. ... How do these, and I, fit into your definition of "necessity"?
How do you or your 26 machines fit into your definition of "most"? :-)
Hard to say. I test things that don't and/or can't get tested via virtualization, very roughly half the time in order to provide answers to people asking for help with hardware-specific problems. Certainly taking 15 machines out of current openSUSE version use will significantly reduce my means to do what I have been doing. Most non-programmer users aren't also active testers finding and filing bugs against pre-release software, and following up instead of filing and never heard from again. Do I count as "a" user? 26? More (e.g. one per installation)? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-09-07 08:20, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Saturday 05 of September 2015 00:27:23 Per Jessen wrote:
Well, given that openSUSE appears to be planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users"
That's only your (mis)interpretation of what is happening. OpenSUSE is not planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users". Only those who insist on staying with 32-bit distribution so strongly that they would rather change the distribution than upgrade to a 64-bit system.
Perhaps you are willing to contribute hardware to me, so that I can replace my working 32 bit machines... - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXt7U8ACgkQja8UbcUWM1zLcQD/VDNpPGjU3OLOEQouZrYDUtFP eWArn6flEDNmzUeJjOYA/0Eqjp7mTqsrqqrY1xYl5jxaFKxaVSLXIiVTv+Ogxa3D =GYTL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. composed on 2015-09-07 22:02 (UTC+0200):
Michal Kubecek wrote:
That's only your (mis)interpretation of what is happening. OpenSUSE is not planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users". Only those who insist on staying with 32-bit distribution so strongly that they would rather change the distribution than upgrade to a 64-bit system.
Perhaps you are willing to contribute hardware to me, so that I can replace my working 32 bit machines...
Ditto. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. composed on 2015-09-07 22:02 (UTC+0200):
Michal Kubecek wrote:
That's only your (mis)interpretation of what is happening. OpenSUSE is not planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users". Only those who insist on staying with 32-bit distribution so strongly that they would rather change the distribution than upgrade to a 64-bit system.
Perhaps you are willing to contribute hardware to me, so that I can replace my working 32 bit machines...
Ditto. +1 -- Linux User 183145 using KDE4 and LXDE on a Pentium IV ,
On Monday, September 07, 2015 04:15:28 PM Felix Miata wrote: powered by openSUSE 20150903 (x86_64) Kernel: 4.1.6-2-desktop KDE Development Platform: 4.14.10 11:27am up 5 days 1:33, 3 users, load average: 0.23, 0.31, 0.31 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 10:02:23PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-09-07 08:20, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Saturday 05 of September 2015 00:27:23 Per Jessen wrote:
Well, given that openSUSE appears to be planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users"
That's only your (mis)interpretation of what is happening. OpenSUSE is not planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users". Only those who insist on staying with 32-bit distribution so strongly that they would rather change the distribution than upgrade to a 64-bit system.
Perhaps you are willing to contribute hardware to me, so that I can replace my working 32 bit machines...
Well, I got rid of one or two 64-bit MB+CPU combos in last few months and I may still have one or two somewhere, unused. But you probably realize that shipping costs might be higher than if you bought one yourself where you live (and no, I'm not going to pay for that). And, of course, there is still an option of staying with older version of the distribution. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Saturday 05 of September 2015 00:27:23 Per Jessen wrote:
Well, given that openSUSE appears to be planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users"
That's only your (mis)interpretation of what is happening. OpenSUSE is not planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users".
Then I have certainly misunderstood something completely.
Only those who insist on staying with 32-bit distribution so strongly that they would rather change the distribution than upgrade to a 64-bit system.
You're playing with words. The end effect is the same. AFAICT, with openSUSE Leap, openSUSE i586 users have only two options - stop using i586 or change distro.
I believe most current i586 openSUSE users do not use this architecture out of necessity. There may be some, sure, but IMHO it's just a small fraction; some (like you) do it for their beliefs but most of them only because of inertia and lack of an impulse strong enough to push them into migration. For those, switching to x86_64 may be an inconvenience - and we should do our best to it as small one as we can - but much less of inconvenience that moving to a different distribution.
The switching is at most a minor inconvenience, I have no issue with that - when I want to switch. However, I don't want to switch because 64bit in my use cases is a drawback.
In other words: I don't believe majority of current i586 openSUSE users would switch to a different distribution just because of the lack of an i586 Leap release. Not by far.
I agree. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.7°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 15:48:05 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Saturday 05 of September 2015 00:27:23 Per Jessen wrote:
Well, given that openSUSE appears to be planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users"
That's only your (mis)interpretation of what is happening. OpenSUSE is not planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users".
Then I have certainly misunderstood something completely.
Only those who insist on staying with 32-bit distribution so strongly that they would rather change the distribution than upgrade to a 64-bit system.
You're playing with words. The end effect is the same. AFAICT, with openSUSE Leap, openSUSE i586 users have only two options - stop using i586 or change distro.
.... if really no one tries to avoid such a situation until the end. I believe we can provide a more user-friendlier soft-landing runway, e.g. by providing a Ports image or such. It would need significant effort, but certainly doable. Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08.09.2015 16:10, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 15:48:05 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Saturday 05 of September 2015 00:27:23 Per Jessen wrote:
Well, given that openSUSE appears to be planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users"
That's only your (mis)interpretation of what is happening. OpenSUSE is not planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users".
Then I have certainly misunderstood something completely.
Only those who insist on staying with 32-bit distribution so strongly that they would rather change the distribution than upgrade to a 64-bit system.
You're playing with words. The end effect is the same. AFAICT, with openSUSE Leap, openSUSE i586 users have only two options - stop using i586 or change distro.
.... if really no one tries to avoid such a situation until the end. I believe we can provide a more user-friendlier soft-landing runway, e.g. by providing a Ports image or such. It would need significant effort, but certainly doable.
I'm not so sure it's significant effort - at the end we build i586 and we even include it in staging, we just don't run any tests on it and we do not generate an image. Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Stephan Kulow wrote:
On 08.09.2015 16:10, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 15:48:05 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Saturday 05 of September 2015 00:27:23 Per Jessen wrote:
Well, given that openSUSE appears to be planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users"
That's only your (mis)interpretation of what is happening. OpenSUSE is not planning to abandon all "current i586 openSUSE users".
Then I have certainly misunderstood something completely.
Only those who insist on staying with 32-bit distribution so strongly that they would rather change the distribution than upgrade to a 64-bit system.
You're playing with words. The end effect is the same. AFAICT, with openSUSE Leap, openSUSE i586 users have only two options - stop using i586 or change distro.
.... if really no one tries to avoid such a situation until the end. I believe we can provide a more user-friendlier soft-landing runway, e.g. by providing a Ports image or such. It would need significant effort, but certainly doable.
I'm not so sure it's significant effort - at the end we build i586 and we even include it in staging, we just don't run any tests on it and we do not generate an image.
Stephan, that sounds quite promising - well, it sounds like that's all we would need? For my purposes, I don't need any images, just the repos. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.8°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08.09.2015 17:03, Per Jessen wrote:
Stephan, that sounds quite promising - well, it sounds like that's all we would need? For my purposes, I don't need any images, just the repos.
Well, I assume you want updates too? Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Stephan Kulow wrote:
On 08.09.2015 17:03, Per Jessen wrote:
Stephan, that sounds quite promising - well, it sounds like that's all we would need? For my purposes, I don't need any images, just the repos.
Well, I assume you want updates too?
Heh, yes, that would be nice of course. How much extra effort would that add? Let me know if there's anything I can help with. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (16.5°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jim Henderson wrote:
If there are enough who care about continuing to develop a 32-bit Leap release, then it'll happen. The current maintainer has said he won't do it, doesn't see the need for it, and has better things to do with his time. That's his call to make.
That's how OSS works.
If someone else is interested, then get involved. Tell the current maintainer you want to try to do this and get some help or pointers to the right help.
(apologies for the delay, I've had a few busy days.) In response - I've been there, tried that. There isn't help nor pointers to be had. At least that's how I have to interpret the silence. Back in June I volunteered to join the release engineering team, Robert Schweikert even kindly wrote a nice introduction. No response, zip, nada, nothing. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (17.0°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, On Aug 28 19:22 Per Jessen wrote (excerpt):
Jim Henderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:23:58 +0200, Johannes Meixner wrote:
I don't know if "voting with the feets" is excatly within the project's policies but I assume there exists some kind of voting mechanism in openSUSE to make decisions ;-)
Maybe the phrase doesn't translate - "voting with your feet" means that when something doesn't meet your needs, you go somewhere else to get something that does.
I meant that before "voting with your feet" it would be better to try to get an official decision within the project's policies.
A lot of the stuff we include (I prefer "include" over "support") might possibly have even less users. iSCSI anyone? SNMP?
If "we include" means "what openSUSE people actively include" it would be a misunderstanding. Such kind of stuff is included in openSUSE as a side effect that it is included in SUSE enterprise products. Stuff that is primarily needed in enterprise environments is usually not actively removed from openSUSE. In contrast (cf. my other mail) 32-bit support is not provided for SLE12 so that 32-bit support is not provided for Leap as a side effect that it is provided for SUSE enterprise products. 32-bit support for Leap requires active extra efforts from openSUSE people. Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-31 11:31, Johannes Meixner wrote:
32-bit support for Leap requires active extra efforts from openSUSE people.
Allow me a daft question. Would it not be possible to flip a switch and build it with -march=386 (or whatever) and, well, be done, more or less automatically? I suppose it is not that simple, but I have no idea of what is so different to make it that hard. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXkIQwACgkQja8UbcUWM1xXcAD/dpxnjbtE9FL6Ob64sSoqRjFt 5DEFCpA+0lMv3PYgPVwA/28ZuJvfaqcuQQB0Un+cZ7dCAelb8H40MYNFxYMx354D =yNwN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-08-31 11:31, Johannes Meixner wrote:
32-bit support for Leap requires active extra efforts from openSUSE people.
Allow me a daft question.
Would it not be possible to flip a switch and build it with -march=386 (or whatever) and, well, be done, more or less automatically?
I suppose it is not that simple, but I have no idea of what is so different to make it that hard.
Well, for LEAP it would be kind-of odd if you expect a stable tested product to "just flip a switch". Richard. -- Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de> SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-08-31 13:32, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Well, for LEAP it would be kind-of odd if you expect a stable tested product to "just flip a switch".
Stable and tested has already been ruled out... - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlXkZg8ACgkQja8UbcUWM1wcrgD/dbtDuMWg4VOMUKj2FQJ0+z8Y JIm96SDbvqqjbOVBGCsA/iMRGzV5zlLMkEum46inR4v4hfuiKv02hHwU/Jx7rg+P =53jo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hi all, In that case why do we waste OBS resources building i586 packages in devel projects based on https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/openSUSE:42 ? Best, Angelos -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Stephan Kulow wrote:
On 27.08.2015 11:34, Andreas Hoffmann wrote:
Dear all,
does for the upcomming version 42.1 a 32 bit version will be available? Nor for milestone 1 I only can find a x64 version.
If 32 bit will be availalbe later on which stage of the development it is to be expected?
Beta? RC? I don't plan to create one at all
Greetings, Stephan
I guess all of us idle non-doers can argue all we want all day when the single doer isn't responding. What do we call a do-ocracy with only one doer? "Bus factor 1"? Signing off for today, am watching "Endeavour: Nocturne" on mythtv, recorded last night, on 32-bit openSUSE. /Per -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
participants (60)
-
Andreas Färber -
Andreas Hoffmann -
Andreas Schwab -
Andrei Borzenkov -
André Verwijs -
Angelos Tzotsos -
Basil Chupin -
Bernhard M. Wiedemann -
Bernhard Voelker -
Brian F. Yulga -
C. Brouerius van Nidek -
Carl Symons -
Carlos E. R. -
Carlos E. R. -
Carlos E.R.
-
Christian Boltz -
Cristian Rodríguez -
Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger -
Dsant -
ellanios82 -
Felix Miata -
Frederic Crozat -
Greg Freemyer -
greg.freemyer＠gmail.com
-
gumb -
Hendrik Woltersdorf -
James Knott -
James Mason -
Jan Engelhardt -
Jan Matejka -
Jim Henderson -
Johannes Meixner -
Johannes Thumshirn -
Kai-Uwe Behrmann -
Ken Schneider - Factory -
Knurpht - Gertjan Lettink -
Larry Finger -
Malcolm -
Manfred Hollstein -
Martin Pluskal -
Mathias Homann -
Michal Kubecek -
Michal Marek -
Ondřej Súkup -
Patrick Shanahan -
Per Jessen -
Richard Biener -
Richard Brown -
Rick Chung -
Robert Schweikert -
Roger Oberholtzer -
Roman Bysh -
Stephan Kulow -
Takashi Iwai -
Thorolf Godawa -
Tobias Klausmann -
Tomáš Chvátal -
Werner Flamme -
Wolfgang Bauer -
Yamaban