12.04 LTS: 64-bit desktop by default?

Steve Langasek steve.langasek at ubuntu.com
Tue Apr 17 17:04:28 UTC 2012

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 08:50:25AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 11:08:41AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 02:14:26AM +0200, Pavel Rojtberg wrote:
> > > I would not bet that 14.04 users necessarily will have to get 64bit.
> > > There is the recent x32-abi[1] development which kind of combines
> > > best of both worlds.

> > Is it worth a UDS session on how we might make use of x32?  Since the
> > patches aren't e.g. on glibc trunk yet, I don't think we can reasonably
> > make any concrete plans, but perhaps we should be thinking in advance
> > about issues such as partial architectures that x32 brings up.

> It's worth noting that running x32 requires a 64-bit kernel. Moving
> to x32 would be as big a deal (if not more) as moving to x86_64 from
> ia32. And personally, I think just moving to x86_64 is the better goal. :)

x32 is meant to be a compromise that gets us the major benefits of x86_64
(better instruction set) without the drawbacks (more memory pressure).
While it's not standardized or proven yet, I think it's definitely worth
keeping an eye on.  We might really find that we don't want x86_64 by
default in 2-4 years because x32 is proving the better choice.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 828 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20120417/cec4f1ad/attachment.pgp>

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list