From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25959 invoked by alias); 13 Jan 2018 09:11:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 25950 invoked by uid 89); 13 Jan 2018 09:11:56 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_COUK,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=UD:co.uk X-HELO: smtp-out-1.tiscali.co.uk Received: from smtp-out-1.tiscali.co.uk (HELO smtp-out-1.tiscali.co.uk) (62.24.135.129) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 13 Jan 2018 09:11:54 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.4] ([78.150.245.167]) by smtp.talktalk.net with SMTP id aHqte7w5V6Fz0aHqxedfoV; Sat, 13 Jan 2018 09:11:52 +0000 Subject: Re: Future of 32-bit distro To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <98715417-cabe-7b0f-8767-fd114cc929e8@t-online.de> <1185EB5F-53C1-4F84-BB14-4424F8C60074@Denis-Excoffier.org> <20180112091344.GA20334@calimero.vinschen.de> From: David Stacey Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Message-ID: Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 09:11:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfL0QBjOG2Pi0aU6L7I1Ql7r2Wx59uxYnx7MaBjXZWUc88hTDgXc0IOX0sZOfWetzjxNL7vP1jFqPPrZNlfGb4cdaZ8ahB7lGSNaCjB9K3pop7u6CBgE8 /1V9SGdluuFKLi6FHZ2alHHdmlPmhGpt1fZofOZbalpDUdB70/0X6qHo X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-01/txt/msg00131.txt.bz2 On 12/01/18 18:11, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: > If it is not possible for the entire 32-bit distribution to function as > a whole, is it time to reconsider how much we provide for 32-bit? And > when can we just drop 32-bit entirely? I suspect there are a great number of people running 32-bit Windows, even if the underlying hardware is capable of running 64-bit. For that reason, I would argue against dropping 32-bit support at the moment - even if it increases my work as a package maintainer. Would it be possible for 'setup_x86.exe' to give a warning if run on a 64-bit OS? That might help. Dave. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple