That's nice to know Fedora's developers point of view on that subject. But I'm
not subscribing to that view. I'm with Richard Stallman. And now I clearly see
why he is opposed to OSS paradigm. Looks like I was in a wrong place for all
these years. Time to move elsewhere.
I'm sorry, but where did you saw that I said something about i686 *kernel*? I
think that I explicitly mentioned *x86_64* kernel with i686 userland and
described why it could be beneficial for some users with limited memory.
As for security, I don't think that running your own computer in a tight
Boy, am I glad you've said that. I was waiting for it.
But looks like you are mistaken. First of all, it's not one, but at least two
of them. Second, nobody else seems to be supporting your point.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Ok, if that's so hard then I'm apologize for not recognizing the pain.
OTOH, if Debian has resources to maintain the support for at least next five
years it means one of two things: either they have more resources than Fedora,
or something is wrong with your assessment.
I'd help with maintainin
May be there are more interested people that we know, but they are not reading
that list. There will just be just every man for himself and Fedora has failed
to recognize that.
This requires time and effort too. Nobody will appear just by a miracle. I
recognize that there is much less people in
I will do whatever I can and it's not much for ANY architecture, x86_64 is not
an exception. That's because I'm not very young and have a lot of other more
important activities which is not related to computers.
That said, I'm not expecting very much in return either. If it would somehow
work o
There is no either right or wrong stance here. We are discussing possible
alternatives to "just drop it" attitude.
What work should be done? Please, be more specific. Right now I'm running a
i686 userland and it works. If I would be able to build the whole repository
myself I'm pretty sure that
I'm happy with any support no matter how it is defined. In fact I didn't get
very much support from Fedora either over more than 20 years, so my
expectations are quite low.
If there is something more relevant than freedom of choice, then there is no
point arguing further, because I value commun
So, if I'd start to use Debian i686 instead of Fedora or will use ARM32 device
instead of ARM64 the world will be a safer place? Also, I was told that
maintaining i686 Fedora code base myself would be fine, but in the same time
I'm told that it's not acceptable from the safety point of view. Why
No I didn't, but I must be sure that you speak on behalf of everyone before
making my choices.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://do
First of all thanks for the link. It just proves that the SIG's expectations
were too high.
If I understand it all correctly, the main reason to drop i686 repo was the
mailing list inactivity? Is that right? So everyone interested in that
architecture is now deprived from using it on Fedora bec
Yes, thanks. Sadly, I see that I have no choice but to switch to another
distribution even though I'm using 64-bit CPU. It's just that the memory can't
be upgraded and buying new computer just to keep running Fedora is not viable.
It's 12 years old, is in good condition and I'm completely satisf
Thanks for the suggestion. But I'm sure that I don't need so much bureaucracy
just to run my little errands. If that's how Fedora is operated, than it won't
make much difference for me to just using another distribution.
BTW, that just means that Fedora is refusing to provide much needed service
But how do you now that I'm not fixed it myself and forgot to post on that
list? Or that I'm even just used to live with that bug and just don't want to
spend all my time chasing it?
I'm pretty sure that I can point point out bugs in official Fedora repository
that were dormant for several year
I would argue that it might be difficult to distinguish work needed to find out
if it was i686 specific when there already is similar bug on x86_64. Also, it's
difficult to rate bug importance for most users. As I've already said that I
was completely satisfied with the status quo and it was a b
No, I don't think so. I'm using some (non Fedora related) applications which
use every bit of available memory. It's a bit stressed just as it is, but
losing additional couple of megabytes for no useful reason will be too much a
hit. And I can't change their code, because that codebase is big an
Ok, now I see that Fedora is just for activists. If I'm not one of them then I
don't deserve any possibility to use it and should blame myself. Thanks for
explaining it to me.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send a
I don't have time to search for it right now, but there is a law which states
that no matter how much resources you already get they will be stretched thin
anyway.
I did upgrades many times but every time it was proved that it still wasn't
enough. It's a useless rat race. We have much more impo
No, just a memory bound behavior. It will eat all memory that you throw on it
and one gigabyte just for starters. After that it will start swapping but some
careful optimization management can avoid that. But if it starts swapping there
will be a major performance hit. And it isn't mission criti
I don't even know anyone whom I could address. I'm already spent too much time
on that list trying to convince everyone that I'm ready to take all the burden
of using unsupported packages, but was told that it's against Fedora policies.
What much could I do?
As for using i686 userland just look
Well, thanks for sharing.
I'm not complaining that nobody wants to fix things for me. I'm complaining
because there is no possibility to fix things myself. After removing i686
repository I'm either should start building it myself or switch to another
distribution. I'm not trying to hurt anyone'
And I thought that should be obvious, silly me. Just kidding.
Of course I would do it if there were no better choice. I'm just struggling to
find out if there is no other possibility whatsoever. There might be reasons
why Fedora is just unable to keep it updated that I don't know. And of course
And why people are not reading all the answers? That was a rhethorical question.
I said it already several times, that I don't need volunteers to fix things for
me! I just need an already built repository which I could just use and fix
things myself if needed. But Fedora is refusing to provide s
And if I don't use those packages, then why should I be unable to use
everything else just because there are some small problems? Especially because
there are not much users of that architecture anyway.
That happens all the time already and I see no big problem with that. If these
packages affe
Oh, brother...
So, you are insisting that Koji just doesn't work without any assistance? And
that it's impossible to build a separate i686 repository without affecting all
others? And that you can't exclude that architecture for a specific package? If
that's the case then it's very different fr
Thanks.
I wouldn't say there is a "hostility" here. It might be hubris at a time, but
mostly indifference. Though, that might frustrate anyone as well.
It's good to know that there are people like you here. But I'm afraid that the
cost of bureaucratic barriers is too high for any single person.
Did I? I thought that I've said that I'm using x86_64 kernel right now and that
I have my memory stretched to the limits already.
But yes, I've experimented with x86_64 userland some time ago, I don't remember
exact numbers but I think that I've lost 100-200 MB of memory. And I have not
much ti
> You are welcome to use the koji buildroot repo for that.
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/f30-build/latest
Thanks. That would be just splendid, but won't it cease to exist after Fedora
30 EOL? Then it's just a temporary workaround.
___
devel
No, of course I didn't mean that it was some random developer's fault. By "the
project" I definitely meant PR and HR in a broad sense. Expecting such casual
participants like me to self-organize is a wild idea. Even placing some
advertisement on Fedora's landing page would be a big help.
I supp
Yes, I've already answered that. It's surely possible, but my experience shows
that putting too much efforts in a too broad customization doesn't pay off in
the end. Every time you'll upgrade to a new version it breaks.
As for using another desktop, I should seriously consider it. Probably I was
But that's actually the same that I was trying to say. Meeting that activity
statistics is the essence of such formal group. But grass-roots enthusiasts
don't have such commitments. They can do some work occasionally if time allows
but there is no strict agenda. This contradicts those expectatio
And even that might not be necessary at all because most bugs are common
between 32 and 64-bit. Honestly, I don't think such SIG was really needed after
all.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-l
Even better. That means that you can still get support for x86 but it will
require some more work on the user's side. They should just check if that bug
is indeed i686 specific.
I believe that all that argument for the lats three days was completely
unnecessary and should be blamed on an utterl
I did test some of these desktops in the past. From my experience LXDT should
be just fine. Anyway, thanks for reminding me, because I was so used to
standard Fedora desktop that completely forgot about such alternatives.
___
devel mailing list -- devel
Yes, that's understandable. But this is beating of a dead horse.
But what matters now is that by doing some small investigation i686 users can
still get support for their bugs which are common for both platforms. This
doesn't require any formalities like SIG or commitments which they can't make
But there should be some reason for that lack of interested volunteers in
Fedora. Right now I'm looking at stats for other distributions which are not
going to drop i686 any time soon, e.g. Debian, NixOS, Gentoo. There must me
some very fundamental difference with how they operate. Of course one
36 matches
Mail list logo
