https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=172590
Bug ID: 172590
Summary: x86-64-v1 drop as per AlmaLinux 9 baseline
Product: LibreOffice
Version: unspecified
Hardware: x86-64 (AMD64)
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: medium
Component: Installation
Assignee: [email protected]
Reporter: [email protected]
Description:
Hello there,
apologize for the bug opening; if it is not the right place, please, be kind
and direct me on the right one and I will discuss it there; thanks in advance.
I cite the official LO's pages:
- "LibreOffice is developed by users who, just like you, believe in the
principles of Free Software and in sharing their work with the world in
non-restrictive ways."
- "We believe that users should have the freedom to run, copy, distribute,
study, change and improve the software that we distribute."
- "We seek to eliminate the digital divide and empower all as full citizens..."
- "At the core of these principles are the four essential freedoms" (I cite the
3rd below)
- "The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others (freedom 2)"
That being said, LibreOffice helps also on digitalization topics in countries
where the technology isnt as spread and advanced as in the other world
countries, and since its own start, the main focus was (also as per citation
before) letting people being able to run the software, especially to not
technical people, without complete tasks/scenarios, spreading the ability to
have an open competitor to others office suite one.
Im a real defender of the latest technology boundaries about security, and
interoperability; for my own I run standards really high, that cant be used in
"business production systems" because they would cut off the connection to 90%
of users; that stated, I have came up with an old Mac that has not the
x86-64-v2 flag. Now it runs Linux to do not create another technology waste and
being able to re-use a still usable device. Unfortunately, I can't run anymore
latest LO due to this feature flag.
First of all, there is not "easy" way to "discover" about it. Being "honest",
the average user does not read every line of a release note, doing what an IT
does (checkings all compatibilities); average user just update even because WE
push the "update" notification. Once update, the suite doesn't start without
prompting any "GUI warning" (I've already opened another bug report to suggest
a fix: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=172589 ). Once
updated (after being suggested by the normal notification), the end user, the
one for which LO's devs work hard (cause you all do it, we know, and thanks for
that) is unable to run a piece of software and without any other "clear"/"easy"
solution, just uninstall it and run another "free" (not real one) competitor.
OK! There are flatpack/etc solution, and ALSO (BUT FOR TECCHY GUYS ONLY) the
opportunity to compile from source. I fully understand on this point, but
people living in third-world countries, what should they do? "Upgrade" their
device (thanks God if they have one) because "RedHat" (a paid company that run
a business), to keep high their standard (completely fine), has setup modern
limit? ... To people that are starting now to use a device, we should say "no
you can't"? Belong to me, it goes *completely* against the main principles of
LO.
Again, I understand completely that we want to release "secure" platform, but
from what Im reading/understanding about it, it is just to fulfill boundaries
establish by a paid company that releases software (being paid for that). But
in this way we FORCE, the AVERAGE end user (the one for which we all work
together to provide to as many possible of them this extraordinary software)
to:
- A change to others software (not real opensource with open mindset in most of
the case)
- Keep an out of date software (and it is a problem we had already in past)
- Wait the AVERAGE user to learn how to switch to other installing solution
- Pay someone to UNDERSTAND what is the problem (cause again, it isnt so fast
to catch it) and, installing another piece of software (first one).
I have read already opened bug about this, and I cite this answer:
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=169747#c6
"AlmaLinux OS 10 has followed Red Hat’s decision to ship x86-64-v3 optimized
binaries by default, but we will also provide an additional x86-64-v2
architecture, allowing users on that older hardware to continue to receive
security updates for another 10 years."
Starting from that, I understand that somewhere in the code there is a
"baseline" file that establishes what are the basic features, but if this will
be possible to extend the v2 architecture, why can't we do also for v1?
If it is just a topic of "flags", and it is not about compatibilities with
other softwares, why can't we support an old flag cpu? In this way possibly a
lot of old pc in communities will be just "dismissed" as "old", increasing the
wasting topics about tech devices.
About anyone that may state about data on "how many of these pc are out there",
I just reply immediately, "is it so tougher to add a cpu flag at official
building process compile time, to support people, instead of waiting to see how
many people needs it?".
Doom can be run on "every" machine, without problems about "cpu flags"
establish by a paid company with a strong revenue model that has to meet
specific requirements. Should we exclude our "old" user, "forcing" them to
establish to change their hardware or use another distro, just for a cpu flag?
So, that said, do you think, as it will be already for v2, it is possible to
include v1 flag back?
Steps to Reproduce:
Running a not x86-64-v2 compatible hardware with 26.x LO version
Actual Results:
Impossibility to run LO
Expected Results:
Improve the official distributed release packages to compile also the flag for
older PC.
If it is possible compiling it by themself, is possible at the official release
Reproducible: Always
User Profile Reset: No
Additional Info:
Already provided everything I hope
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
