32 bit AMI registration boot problem: explaination and possible solutions

[Joe Brockmeier]

On 11/03/2014 11:51 PM, Mike Ruckman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 07:25:28PM -0500, Dusty Mabe wrote:
>> I would love to get rid of the 32bit AMIs. That being said, is this a "knee jerk" 
>> reaction? Typically it's best to make changes like this with planning involved 
>> and sufficient notice of the change so the community can prepare.
>>
>> Again, I'm all for getting rid of them. Just want to make sure we think about everything.
>>
>> Dusty 
> 
> I wasn't meaning it to come across as a knee jerk reaction - I was just curious
> after thinking about who *uses* a 32bit image when a 64bit is available?
> Especially for cloud where 64bit is supported everywhere someone might be
> launching our image from.

Indeed. Given the way things work in Fedora, I didn't imagine that
saying "yes, we should get rid of these if there's not a reason to keep
them" meant they'd disappear immediately. (If only things happened that
quickly...)

> The thing I thought about was perhaps there's some package people run on a
> regular basis that was only available in 32bit - but then again, if it was a
> commonly used package it's likely (if not for certain) there is a x86_64 version
> of it in the repos already.
> 
> All that being said, I just figured I'd ask if we still need a 32bit AMI. I was
> counting on everyone else having more background knowledge into this than I
> have :)

Do we have any way of seeing how many people actually use the 32-bit AMI
on AWS?

Best,

jzb
-- 
Joe Brockmeier | Principal Cloud & Storage Analyst
jzb at redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb  | http://dissociatedpress.net/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/attachments/20141104/d1663362/attachment.sig>