Re: i686 as secondary arch?
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Timely article in the Register today:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/05/linux_letting_go_32bit_builds_on_...
I've been thinking about this as i686 is so often broken that I've now
stopped bothering to test it in the libguestfs tests that I do on
Rawhide:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/libguestfs.git/commit/?id=aa63cef...
If you need to run an i686 virtual machine based on Rawhide, my
experience is that it's more likely than not that it won't boot, and
no one cares.
Do we have stats for the relative proportion of i686 vs x86-64 downloads?
No really because of mirrors etc, but mirror manager stats from Feb
(FPL DevConf talk) list i686 as around 20% unique IP hits, that
doesn't take into account proxies/NAT using same IP etc.