X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:reply-to:message-id :date:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=hbHdLYJD6o/9Gjpc 7zt8zhezFzvjVLmvmddy7ty5+/UBfbAWKTtgdw5TBEoKdcP6lerK7i02+DBbg1Jc 01Z0CcnXBygy2OFQj22Tms3/mPMu+TKNGmzirjoU3tweIu+AGllPYb5hiyJjW7zx MOIzVa1qdasINI/BOZY/I4EtlJ4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:reply-to:message-id :date:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=u/VQIwkDxVbLs09DEKbDgo dI9Eo=; b=sdNpnC5CUmBMHcARa0ITpPVgQAMf4wHJD/SA2I/G3t7bPY1hnL4NjS 4kzV3wrTY7Wj6TImTg8MDccFGUBDtUb9jhNEsGa+kQhBbc6h7YPkf0ZKbajGmVk/ Ap6YtkxGiEQiMdU0N4AMEQd/ZruihIydVHrchiTEL5g7msldfpKxg= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com 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 Subject: Re: Future of 32-bit distro To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <98715417-cabe-7b0f-8767-fd114cc929e8 AT t-online DOT de> <1185EB5F-53C1-4F84-BB14-4424F8C60074 AT Denis-Excoffier DOT org> <20180112091344 DOT GA20334 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> From: David Stacey Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 09:11:47 +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 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