default file system, was: Comparison to Workstation Technical Specification

[Stephen Gallagher]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/26/2014 04:03 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi (kevin at scrye.com) said:
>> Another aspect of xfs we may want to investigate and get feedback
>> from filesystem folks is how well xfs works on 32bit these days.
>> 
>> 
>> RHEL7 doesn't have a 32bit version in their beta, so they only
>> need to support 64bit xfs. Does the fact that we expect to have
>> 32bit workstation and/or server weigh into this decision any?
> 
> We expect to have a 32-bit workstation or server?
> 
> Not trying to troll, but I don't know that any of these were
> specifically discussed or specified in the products - are there any
> arches where Fedora currently exists that we don't necessarily care
> about having a particular product on? (For example, if you expand
> to secondary arches, I'd question the idea of s390 Workstation.)
> 
> Bill, who does have a 32-bit x86 server under his home desk...
> 

That's one of the topics scheduled to be discussed in the Server
Technical Specification meeting tomorrow. My personal opinion is that
the Server should support any arch defined by FESCo as a "primary
arch", which today would mean 32-bit and 64-bit x86 as well as armv7hl.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlMOWKAACgkQeiVVYja6o6Nq2wCglaZgxI1o5ygsqxPkCzCmsRo7
KCoAoKjTAfW+tOwgV9gLqsJuIJMACCY0
=7bJy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----