Legacy System Support
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| This article is a stub. You can help the wiki by expanding it. |
 This article may require cleanup to meet the quality standards of the wiki. Please improve this article if you can.
|
|
we have a ton of 32 bit windows users trying to download and run FlightGear. Out of the box with the startup defaults that pretty much doesn't work right now. This is leading to a ton of bug reports, a ton of frustrated new users, and a general perception that FlightGear is a POS that isn't worth messing with. — Curtis Olson (Feb 5th, 2015). Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear on low (<=4GB) memory systems.
(powered by Instant-Cquotes) |
|
|
|
the honest truth is that we really aren't cutting it right now for 32 bit windows. I'm starting from the facts here, which are different from what I and most people want. I don't want to drop 32 bit windows support, but effectively through non-action we have already dropped the ball here several versions ago. — Curtis Olson (Feb 5th, 2015). Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear on low (<=4GB) memory systems.
(powered by Instant-Cquotes) |
|
|
|
32-bit systems continue to exist and work, like my not so old 32-bit Vista system, so I certainly do NOT think 32-bit system support should be dropped — Geoff McLane (Feb 5th, 2015). Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear on low (<=4GB) memory systems.
(powered by Instant-Cquotes) |
|
|
|
I believe dropping 32-bit support is premature. I worry that some of us may be tempted to apply the argument "Well, I don't use it and haven't for years" to everyone in the community. I suspect there may be many folks running 32-bit systems using Flightgear who are not very vocal or active in the community and might be rudely surprised at not having a 32-bit option. I'm not in a position to know just how much of a pain it is to continue 32-bit support, but if that issue can be dealt with or at least mitigated then I vote to continue 32-bit support. — Gary Neely (Feb 5th, 2015). Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear on low (<=4GB) memory systems.
(powered by Instant-Cquotes) |
|
| Project issues |
|---|
32 bit Support
|
|
People do feel strongly about legacy system support - I seem to be getting into a gazillion of heated discussions on that. So kicking 32bit will evoke some strong responses for sure.
— Renk, Thorsten (2015-02-05). Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear on low (<=4GB) memory systems.
(powered by Instant-Cquotes) |
|
|
|
I use a very simple tweak of the code. Linux 32 bit with 4 GB RAM. Please don't drop support for 32 bit archs.
— Adrian Musceac (2015-02-05). Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear on low (<=4GB) memory systems.
(powered by Instant-Cquotes) |
|
|
|
32-bit systems continue to exist and work, like my not so old 32-bit Vista system, so I certainly do NOT think 32-bit system support should be dropped
— Geoff McLane (2015-02-05). Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear on low (<=4GB) memory systems.
(powered by Instant-Cquotes) |
|
|
|
if more system level metrics (available RAM/VRAM, platform/architecture) were exposed as properties, we could either bail out during startup or at least disable certain options at run-time and show a dialog. People wanting to run Rembrandt or ALS on Intel GMA hardware is just plain ridiculous and should probably be discouraged - once such things are in the property tree, it only takes a handful lines of Nasal code to make certain settings unavailable (via the GUI that is)
|
|