5 ms·

presumably they are going to scrub 32 bit support entirely, including from the kernel.

by throwaway2048 9y ago

pvg 9y ago
Eventually. Certainly not in this or next major release and the rate of adoption/updates will very likely influence the schedule. There are a lots of widely used apps out there that are 32 bit. Steam, for one, which probably matters more in that market segment than Wine.
- shmerl 9y ago
  I suppose for those who play games on macOS, it's not Steam itself that's a problem, but quite a big amount of actual 32-bit only games. Both macOS and Windows ones (that could run in Wine until now). I hope when Linux distros will start dropping 32-bit support, they'll still keep multiarch around for such purposes.
  - pvg 9y ago
    Right, but that's the gist of what I mean - I don't think 'macOS update that suddenly and irrevocably kills most of your Steam library' is on the horizon.
    - danieldk 9y ago
      Why not? on iOS they started warning on starting 32-bit apps in 10.3 and killed 32-bit app support in iOS 11. I can imagine that they will be a bit more gentle with macOS, given its longer history, but I wouldn't be surprised if they yank all 32-bit system libraries in High Sierra + 2. This is typical Apple and has it upsides (unlike Android/Windows, applications do not rely on ancient APIs) and downsides (breaks compatibility). Also, part of the motivation here may be to kill Carbon as soon as possible. If Marzipan materializes, they probably do not want to maintain Carbon, AppKit, and Marzipan/UIKit simultaneously.
      - macintux 9y ago
        February 2015 was the deadline for apps to support 64 bits with any new updates in the App Store. So developers had 2.5 years to prepare for iOS 11. Users had less warning, true, but the situation was different since they also had no way to acquire apps outside the App Store.
  - jammi 9y ago
    You can still have VMs for 32bit games, and if there's a big demand for them, bet on someone creating a gaming-oriented VM.
  - chungy 9y ago
    > I hope when Linux distros will start dropping 32-bit support, they'll still keep multiarch around for such purposes. A bit late for the comment there. Pretty much the only distros that still support x86-32 as an installation/host option are Debian, Slackware, and Gentoo. Everybody else (including Ubuntu) has gone 64bit-or-bust. Mind that the latter half still applies. The kernel is still capable of running 32-bit applications in a 64-bit environment, and no distro has removed multiarch support, and likely won't.
    - shmerl 9y ago
      > and no distro has removed multiarch support, and likely won't. My only concern is, that with general dropping of 32-bit, multiarch versions of packages will be bitten by bit rot, because no one will be maintaining them.
      - lmm 9y ago
        Well, if people are using them those people will report bugs, if no-one is using them then they will rot but it won't matter. It hurts if you're using one obscure package that no-one else is, but that's the software life. /I was quite possibly the last gentoo/sparc32 user
- 0x0 9y ago
  Apple has in fact stated that High Sierra is the last major release to run 32bit apps "without compromise" (their words). So probably a macOS 10.14 could show up in a couple of months at WWDC without 32bit app support, just like iOS 11 did last year.
  - macintux 9y ago
    > So probably a macOS 10.14 could show up in a couple of months at WWDC without 32bit app support I don't understand your reasoning. They're implicitly (but strongly implicitly) saying 10.14 will run 32-bit apps. What's uncertain is what "compromises" they'll entail. Even Apple wouldn't drop all support for 32-bit apps with just a few months' warning. They're ruthless about moving forward, but not quite that cruel.
    - 0x0 9y ago
      But that's exactly what they did in iOS 11?
      - pvg 9y ago
        They also announced exactly that. Not the case for this or the next major revision of macOS.
      - macintux 9y ago
        February 2015 was the deadline for apps to support 64 bits with any new updates in the App Store. So developers had 2.5 years to prepare for iOS 11.
        0x0 9y ago
        Additional requirements for new apps or updates to apps is something completely different from disabling existing purchased apps and denying end users access to their documents contained within.
        9y ago

presumably they are going to scrub 32 bit support entirely, including from the kernel.

pvg 9y ago

Eventually. Certainly not in this or next major release and the rate of adoption/updates will very likely influence the schedule. There are a lots of widely used apps out there that are 32 bit. Steam, for one, which probably matters more in that market segment than Wine.

shmerl 9y ago
I suppose for those who play games on macOS, it's not Steam itself that's a problem, but quite a big amount of actual 32-bit only games. Both macOS and Windows ones (that could run in Wine until now). I hope when Linux distros will start dropping 32-bit support, they'll still keep multiarch around for such purposes.
- pvg 9y ago
  Right, but that's the gist of what I mean - I don't think 'macOS update that suddenly and irrevocably kills most of your Steam library' is on the horizon.
  - danieldk 9y ago
    Why not? on iOS they started warning on starting 32-bit apps in 10.3 and killed 32-bit app support in iOS 11. I can imagine that they will be a bit more gentle with macOS, given its longer history, but I wouldn't be surprised if they yank all 32-bit system libraries in High Sierra + 2. This is typical Apple and has it upsides (unlike Android/Windows, applications do not rely on ancient APIs) and downsides (breaks compatibility). Also, part of the motivation here may be to kill Carbon as soon as possible. If Marzipan materializes, they probably do not want to maintain Carbon, AppKit, and Marzipan/UIKit simultaneously.
    - macintux 9y ago
      February 2015 was the deadline for apps to support 64 bits with any new updates in the App Store. So developers had 2.5 years to prepare for iOS 11. Users had less warning, true, but the situation was different since they also had no way to acquire apps outside the App Store.
- jammi 9y ago
  You can still have VMs for 32bit games, and if there's a big demand for them, bet on someone creating a gaming-oriented VM.
- chungy 9y ago
  > I hope when Linux distros will start dropping 32-bit support, they'll still keep multiarch around for such purposes. A bit late for the comment there. Pretty much the only distros that still support x86-32 as an installation/host option are Debian, Slackware, and Gentoo. Everybody else (including Ubuntu) has gone 64bit-or-bust. Mind that the latter half still applies. The kernel is still capable of running 32-bit applications in a 64-bit environment, and no distro has removed multiarch support, and likely won't.
  - shmerl 9y ago
    > and no distro has removed multiarch support, and likely won't. My only concern is, that with general dropping of 32-bit, multiarch versions of packages will be bitten by bit rot, because no one will be maintaining them.
    - lmm 9y ago
      Well, if people are using them those people will report bugs, if no-one is using them then they will rot but it won't matter. It hurts if you're using one obscure package that no-one else is, but that's the software life. /I was quite possibly the last gentoo/sparc32 user
0x0 9y ago
Apple has in fact stated that High Sierra is the last major release to run 32bit apps "without compromise" (their words). So probably a macOS 10.14 could show up in a couple of months at WWDC without 32bit app support, just like iOS 11 did last year.
- macintux 9y ago
  > So probably a macOS 10.14 could show up in a couple of months at WWDC without 32bit app support I don't understand your reasoning. They're implicitly (but strongly implicitly) saying 10.14 will run 32-bit apps. What's uncertain is what "compromises" they'll entail. Even Apple wouldn't drop all support for 32-bit apps with just a few months' warning. They're ruthless about moving forward, but not quite that cruel.
  - 0x0 9y ago
    But that's exactly what they did in iOS 11?
    - pvg 9y ago
      They also announced exactly that. Not the case for this or the next major revision of macOS.
    - macintux 9y ago
      February 2015 was the deadline for apps to support 64 bits with any new updates in the App Store. So developers had 2.5 years to prepare for iOS 11.
      - 0x0 9y ago
        Additional requirements for new apps or updates to apps is something completely different from disabling existing purchased apps and denying end users access to their documents contained within.
        9y ago