[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: AMD64 Status Update -- And Future Directions

* Roland Fehrenbacher (rf@q-leap.de) wrote:
> John, your arguments might make more sense in a Debian centric world, but a lot
> of, if not most users (rather than maybe some developers) don't live in such a
> world, and still want to use and love Debian. So maybe it boils down to the
> question: is Debian for their developers only or does it also listen to their
> users. I think the latter is the case. As I said, it is your time you invest,
> and there are certainly worse ways of where to put it. But please don't try to
> influence people with in my opinion simplistic and (sorry for the repetition)
> Debian centric arguments.

Uhh, of course they're Debian centric, this is the Debian operating
system we're talking about.  I *don't* think this is developer-centric,
as you're implying.

> Comparing niche architectures like that to x86 is not valid. Backwards
> compatibilty is a major issue (just in terms of number of users) for x86 but
> not for the platforms you listed.

The point is that those other architectures are just as useful as x86
when you're using Debian.

>     >> myself: Multiarch is actually working now!!!!
>     John> That is completely false.
> Please reread my e-mail from Monday. A little cleanup (which should be done
> soon if possible) will fix those problems.

So do it.  Prove us wrong about how much longer it'll take.  Somehow I
doubt we'll see multiarch within a year.

> Well, you mentioned performance right. Some people actually really need it,
> and they require the Intel compiler whether it is part of Debian or not.

Sounds like you might be better off running i386 on amd64 then.  Feel
free to, the rest of us are going to take advantage of the architecture
(you know, *amd64*).

>     John> I think you are the one making flawed arguments here.
>     John> But in any case, I think there is something deeply troubling about
>     John> the multiarch supporters shouting at me:
>     John>   Stop!!! Stop!!!  You'll make people want to join you!!!
>     John> Let's let people have their own free will.  If they want to join the
>     John> pure64 project, they will; if it sucks, they won't; and I don't see
>     John> the too as being exclusive clubs.
> Well sometimes it is better to use one's brain before running in some direction
> and later finding out it was wrong. Who is talking about people not having
> their free will? I think it must be allowed to give arguments for both
> sides and everyone can decide what he wants to do. I believe that multiarch is
> the better way, and I try to convince others about this, just like you do for
> your proposal.

That's right, people can decide what they want to do, they can either
use the 64bit-only port, work on multiarch, or do both.  The problem is
that people keep trying to convince us with flawed arguments that the
64bit-only port is a bad idea and seem concerned that people might
actually find it useful.

> Short term popularity is not always the best indicator.

Sure, but if it's short-term then people will return to multiarch and it
will continue after such short-term.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: