These are generic servers. I can provide a link to the vendor's website when I get home. It is not Dell, Lenovo or similar, those are currently selling mostly x86_64. Additionally, many users don't want to buy a new computer just because a software project made the decision to randomly drop support for their architecture. I am certainly one of those. The hardware is fine, perfect working condition. I don't understand why we should simply turn these to e-waste because somebody flipped the proverbial switch.
Also, what issues have you run into with x86 other than issues with the memory limit? Most of my systems do not have more than 4 GiB of memory to begin with. My laptop is, perhaps, the only exception among my personal hardware, and that's an X200T from 2009.
On September 17, 2019 9:06:49 PM UTC, Stephen John Smoogen smooge@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 16:53, John M. Harris, Jr. johnmh@splentity.com wrote:
I do mean 32 bit. Contrary to what is published in the Magazine
article, x86 systems are still produced to this day, and are not unpopular. I have 14 of such systems, 4 produced within the last year.
Popularity is a loaded word which can mean whatever one wants depending on the situation. I say this because it has gotten bandied about on both sides of this debate for the last year. I really tried to find an x86_32 box from Dell, Lenovo or other vendors today and couldn't find any. That doesn't mean they don't exist.. it just means that whatever google magic I have failed me. It also doesn't mean that x86_32 isn't being used in some specific field.. but again most everything I ran into was all the problems that x86_32 boxes have with memory limitations etc.. You might have other search results or better words, but unless we both use them, we are in two different worlds.
When you are saying you have systems can you be specific on what they are and where you got them. Also what you are using them for. One of the problems with trying to 'solve' the x86_32 problem is that we have been trying to solve ALL of it, and it might be better aimed at pointing at a specific subset and getting the people there to join together. It probably won't be in Fedora since the goals of the distribution may not match.
On September 17, 2019 8:50:23 PM UTC, Samuel Sieb samuel@sieb.net
wrote:
On 9/17/19 1:48 PM, John M. Harris, Jr. wrote:
I have 14 systems that failed to update to F31 (predictably so).
These
are x86 systems, which previously had no major issues. I have
reverted
to a previous snapshot using a recovery disk.
Predictably? Do you have more details than that? Or by x86 are you meaning 32-bit? ________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-- Sent from my mobile device. Please excuse my brevity. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-- Stephen J Smoogen. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org