We would have to since other users on the system can have shortcuts pointing to the original location. We've also performed some minimal testing that this is fine when we looked into this a couple of years ago.
Robert On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Ryan VanderMeulen <rya...@gmail.com> wrote: > How would we handle going from Program Files (x86) to Program Files? Just > leave the install directory as-is for updates? > > > On 5/12/2016 11:45 AM, Ted Mielczarek 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
