[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:
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, 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:
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,
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):
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 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.
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):
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 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.
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 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.
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... -- 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://openbenchmar