[syslinux] 32bit OS on 64bit architectures

[Ady Ady]

> ok - i do understand the point. and i do guess the hint was also 
> included in ady's answer.
> 
 
 
Hmm... I'm not sure I understand. I do not recall any specific hint of 
mine in this email thread.


"TL;DR":
 I (still) claim that Peter's statements in this email thread are 
incorrect at this time.


I do not know whether the following clarification (or attempt of it) is 
really needed / welcomed, but just in case...

Regarding the potential need, or choice, for someone to use a 32-bit 
kernel nowadays, I have no problem, criticism, question, doubt... I 
could find several reasons for such use-case, still in these days. I 
took this detail as known data to be considered as part of the initial 
matter/question. Hence, in my reply to Peter (hpa), I had nothing to 
say about his question / phrase / comment regarding using a 32-bit 
kernel (in these days).

On the other hand, my reply to Peter was very much focusing on his 
claim regarding which UEFI bootloader(s) (i.e. x32/x64) is/are capable 
of booting which kernel (32/64-bits) in which hardware (AFAICT, 
"x86_64" is the only type of microprocessor that is relevant to this 
matter in the Syslinux Mailing List). With all due respect, I think 
Peter's claims are not correct.

As far as I can tell, several reports would indicate that my statements 
about this matter are accurate at this time, and they contradict those 
posted by Peter in this email thread.

When I replied to Peter's email, my only intention was (and still is) 
to avoid potential misunderstandings from users/readers. If my 
statements were not clear enough, or if my wording could be potentially 
(mis)interpreted as hinting about some other matter(s), it wasn't my 
intention and I apologize for it.

But, of course, I could also be wrong. If it turns out that my prior 
email in this email thread included inaccurate / incorrect statements, 
or if my current understanding of users' reports happens to be 
incorrect in any way, I would appreciate a clarification and 
explanations about the matter. I think a more-technical explanation 
(perhaps based on actual source code?) would be a better way to clarify 
the matter so as to avoid misunderstandings in the future. 
Unfortunately, the chances that the main author of the relevant UEFI 
code in Syslinux would read this email thread and reply here is very 
low.

Regards,
Ady.

PS:
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?