On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Tobias B. Besemer < tobias.bese...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Am Freitag, 13. Mai 2016 22:41:01 UTC+2 schrieb Benjamin Smedberg: > > We have considered this, but in the grand rollout plans for 64-bit > Firefox > > it's low on the list. We're still dealing with Flash > sandboxing/functional > > regressions as a blocker for wider rollout, and the next step is probably > > to progressively roll out win64 to new users before we consider anything > > for existing users. > > > > This will be much easier now that we have widevine and are dropping > > npapi/silverlight, but addon compat is also a concern and we wanted to > > partly wait for webextensions before pushing more on this. > > > > --BDS > > Sounds like a plan for me! > Maybe there can be a ship of a installer that include 32bit & 64bit? > Or at least have one web-installer for both versions? > Also giving the user the change to make a easy upgrade from 32bit to 64bit > with the offline-installer would be nice and a good test-drive for a future > auto-update... > The installer does not equal auto-update. Two separate things entirely. Download size for a combined installer is not something we want to do to people on slow network connection but the auto selection via the stub installer is planned though no completion date yet due to other work having priority. > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Ted Mielczarek <t...@mielczarek.org> > wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > Given all the discussion around SSE[2] lately, I was curious as to > > > whether we had made any plans to update Windows users that are running > > > 32-bit Windows builds on a 64-bit Windows OS to our 64-bit Windows > > > builds. The 64-bit Windows builds do use SSE2, since that's a baseline > > > requirement for x86-64 processors, and the overall performance should > > > generally be better (modulo memory usage, I'm not sure if we have an > > > exact comparison). Additionally 64-bit builds are much less likely to > > > encounter OOM crashes due to address space fragmentation since they > have > > > a very large address space compared to the maximum 4GB available to the > > > 32-bit builds. > > > > > > It does seem like we'd need some minimal checking here, obviously first > > > for whether the user is running 64-bit Windows, but also possibly > > > whether they use 32-bit plugins (until such time as we unsupport > NPAPI). > > > 32-bit plugins will not work on a 64-bit Windows Firefox (we do not > have > > > the equivalent of Universal binaries like we do on OS X). > > > > > > -Ted > > > _______________________________________________ > > > dev-platform mailing list > > > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > > > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
