Re: RE: Cygwin x86 end-of-life

[Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSw.ab.ca>]

On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 15:51:34 +0000, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 14/11/2022 21:29, Jason Pyeron wrote:
>> On Monday, November 14, 2022 3:17 PM, Brian Inglis wrote:
>>> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 16:25:18 +0000, Jon Turney wrote:
>>>> On 11/11/2022 16:16, Jon Turney wrote:
>>>>> On 11/11/2022 15:50, Jon Turney wrote:
>>>>>> As has previously been announced, Cygwin is dropping support for x86
>>>>>> Windows. Cygwin 3.3.6 is the final version supporting x86 (32-bit)
>>>>>> Windows, and the forthcoming Cygwin 3.4 will be released for x86_64 only.
>>>>>> Concurrent with that, updates to x86 packages will be stopped, and the
>>>>>> Cygwin x86 package repository will be archived.

>>>>> I plan to pause package uploads this coming Monday (2022-11-14), before
>>>>> starting the re-organization of the package repository to make this
>>>>> archive.

>>>> Since there have been some complaints about short notice, and to give
>>>> time to work out the issues with gettext/libunistring, I'm going to
>>>> defer this by one week, until Monday 2022-11-21.

>>> Thank you very much appreciated, hopefully we can deal with the remaining issues
>>> quickly.

>> I do not have an articulate retort to ending support, but all I can say is
>> that I feel there must be a middle ground.
>> I feel that there could and should be some form of "we don’t support it"
>> but we are not going out of our way to prevent it.

> I'm unclear if this means:
> (a) "releasing Cygwin 3.4.x DLL for x86 OS"
> (b) "don't require x86 uploads, but don't prevent them, either"
> The problem I have with (b) is that we probably end up in a state where 
> x86 is missing package updates people want or need; or broken, but we 
> don't know it, because nobody uses it.

>> Can I throw resources at a solution? If so what?

> Sure, if that's what you want to do.
> According surveys, 32-bit Windows has a fraction of 1% market share, and 
> declining. Our own (limited) metrics are in accord with that, so I 
> basically see any time I spend on this as wasted.
> So, the first resource you'll need provide is manpower.

The decision makes sense with those numbers.
Do we have numbers to say what the situation is with Windows mingw64-i686 crosses?
Should we also be dropping those at the same time, if there is only 1% use of 
that platform?
In which case, we should announce that, and add that to the EoL notices.

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis			Calgary, Alberta, Canada

La perfection est atteinte			Perfection is achieved
non pas lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à ajouter	not when there is no more to add
mais lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à retirer	but when there is no more to cut
			-- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry