Support us on Patreon
PayPalThere was a whole lot of discussion recently for the Fedora Linux proposal to drop 32-bit support, with the current plan being dropped.
I covered the initial proposal here on GamingOnLinux with the current problems it would cause, like how Bazzite would have been forced to shut. Thankfully, for now at least, the whole proposal has been withdrawn by the original developer that submitted it.
Writing in the Fedora forum feedback thread about it, the developer Fabio Valentini said:
Given feedback in this thread (and to a lesser extent, also on the mailing list) I have decided to withdraw this proposal.
It is clear that the Fedora 44 target for this Change was too early. To some degree, I expected this to be the case, and was prepared to move the proposed implementation of the Change to a later release. Fedora 44 was just the earliest “reasonable” target. However, I think this also shows an inherent conflict in the current Changes process - if a big Change (like this one) is submitted quite early (out of caution!), that also front-loads the discussion and decision process instead of giving things more time. For example, I don’t think the discussion would have been meaningfully different if the targeted release had been Fedora 46 instead of 44 - which is one of the reasons why I decided to withdraw the change instead of just re-targeting it at a later Fedora release.
I don’t think the problem that was attempted to be addressed with this proposal will go away. With more and more projects dropping official support for building / running their software on 32-bit architectures, it’s just going to get worse over the next few years. Dealing with widely used software falling out from under our feet won’t be fun. To some degree, always pushing the latest and greatest
software in Fedora is also working against us here - if we just stuck with foo 1.0 LTS for 10 years, we just wouldn’t need to care that foo 3.0 dropped support for running on 32-bit systems …
I am disappointed in some of the reactions this
proposal
I am now looking forward to seeing actual (and actionable) counter-proposals.
At least for now there's no issues continuing gaming on Fedora, but this situation will come up again in future. Hopefully a more thought-out plan will be made for it as to not cause issues with the likes of Steam and various 32-bit games and apps that will never be updated.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
See more from me
You can also find comments for this article on social media: 
m2mg2 a day ago
Getting flashbacks to the absolute shitshow 2 years ago when Fedora had another brilliant proposal that people went to war over, I thought I recognized Fabios name from the discussions. If you forgor, perhaps purged your memory banks or just live under rock-sized boulders, you may interwebsearchnaningans the following: F40 Change Request: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
I saw the writing on the wall then and abandoned Fedora. It's unfortunate because the software is great but the developers have become toxic to the user and say what you want but there is a clear influence by RedHat and it's not a good one. It's totally legitimate for users to say they will leave if they feel abandoned by the product and Fedora is abandoning the well being and needs of the users. They are becoming like Microsoft where they think they know what is in the users best interest better then the users themselves do. Anything they decide to do is correct because THEY THINK it is in the best interest of the users even if the users don't. Some of these developers seethe with contempt for users while claiming to be looking out for their best interests. It's fine if you're going to have that perspective, it's your right. But it's against the history and values of what Fedora used to be. Granted they've removed some of the privacy language since the telemetry fiasco but at this point they might as well say it's made by developers, for Redhat but you're free to use it if you want. I've comfortably settled in Debian since then and I'm much happier.
Last edited by m2mg2 on 2 Jul 2025 at 2:54 am UTC
kneekoo a day ago
Eike a day ago
Don't you think Flatpak will face the same problem as Ubuntu and Fedora?
Why would it? That's antithetical to the concept of Flatpak itself. The purpose of it is to provide sandboxed environments for applications that contain the exact dependencies they need. These dependencies are not installed to the system resources directory (/usr) like typical libraries, and it would make absolutely no sense to disallow the use of i386 libs since they aren't actually touching the base OS.
There's no problem with "touching the base OS". 32 bit and 64 bit can reside side by side all fine.
The problem is that 32 bit libraries are more and more unmaintained, more and more difficult to build.
(Fedora people are saying this in 2025 - and Ubuntu people have been saying this in 2019 already! (https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/intel-32bit-packages-on-ubuntu-from-19-10-onwards/11263/2)
What's "antithetical to the concept of Flatpak" here?
Delivering maintained software? (Sorry, I could absolutely not resist.)
Eduardo Medina a day ago
Anyone see the irony of this situation? Linux users have been enticing Windows users to start using Linux because Microsoft has the audacity to block users of older technology from using the most recent version of its desktop OS. Meanwhile, Linux distros are on the verge of doing the very same type of thing. You know, some folks would probably still prefer to use typewriters, carbon paper, and whiteout. Does that mean the rest us should keep that stuff around, just in case?I think that the situation is the opposite. Windows doesn't kill anything, it keeps very old components for decades that makes the operating system extremely heavy and inefficient. By other hand, some Linux distros try to kill old components to only maintain modern and maintained components and to lighten the operating system.
Many people say that IBM is turning Linux into Windows, but are the nostalgics who try to transform Linux into Windows dragging tons of old components.
Caldathras a day ago
But forcing every distribution to drag around 32bit libs just for Steam ... I don't think Valve should be allowed to hold us all hostage with this.It's not just Valve's Steam client, you know ...
if ppl would have adopt FlatpakIf people would have to adopt Flatpak? ... What happened to free choice here? Why should I be forced to use it if I don't want to use it?
@Eduardo Medina
Windows doesn't kill anything, it keeps very old components for decadesHuh? Since when? These days, old Windows software runs better on Linux than it does on newer versions of Windows. Admittedly, M$ isn't as ruthless as Apple but still ...
Also, refer to the quote from @CajunMoses
Microsoft has the audacity to block users of older technology from using the most recent version of its desktop OS.In case you didn't know it, Windows 11 enforces planned obsolescence by unnecessarily requiring specific hardware security features that are only available on new computers (mostly 2019 or later), forcing the discard of perfectly good hardware to use Windows 11. For those of us who prefer the quality of older hardware, M$ is giving us the finger.
Vortex_Acherontic 22 hours ago
It's not just Valve's Steam client, you know ...
Same story if you ask me. They shouldn't bee allowed to force distributions to drag around 32bit libraries.
If people would have to adopt Flatpak? ... What happened to free choice here? Why should I be forced to use it if I don't want to use it?
Never said that ppl should use Flatpaks no matter what. I brought it up as a solution to the issue and if a broader audience would be using it the whole discussion might have taken a different turn.
I did not wanted to argue away ppls freedom of choice here. If some don't like Flatpak this is fine by me. If ppl like to run 16bit OSes to run 16bit Software. Go ahead do it. In the end I am not affected by an individuals choice of software.
If flatpak does not suite the user then maybe Distrobox and Toolbox are more suitable to run 32bit Linux (or one with 32bit support) from a container on 64bit. Apparently the choice of distros supporting 32bit will shrink over time. Also not as well sandboxed as Flatpak thought but this works as well. I use it on a daily basis to run software not designed for my distribution of choice for example.
Maybe even Snapcraft has 32bit compatibility? Idk maybe someone can tell if this works.
Therefore I do not see any issues in removing 32bit support from a distro if they want to do it. As compatibility seems to be already there and in a seemingly more secure way.
In the end we all can probably agree 32bit support will vanish over time. Why not taking the opportunity to seek ways to run the legacy software in a more future proofed scenario? Instead of being required to rely on the good will of distribution to still supporting 32bit packages?
The bottom line is, there are a lot of people using 32-bit software. Either the 32-bit versions of what that software needs in order to run have to be maintained, or some emulation thing needs to exist that creates the same result with less maintenance overhead. Putting stuff in a Flatpak neither maintains any libraries nor represents emulation. It is not relevant.
The alternative is to just not do it and pretend this is a defensible position. I don't think "but having my OS actually run software is hard and users who insist on it are being unrealistic" is a defensible technical position.
Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 2 Jul 2025 at 10:28 pm UTC
Eike 13 hours ago
I think that the situation is the opposite. Windows doesn't kill anything, it keeps very old components for decades that makes the operating system extremely heavy and inefficient.
When we're talking about old libraries, the "advantage" of Windows is "DLL Hell": Every game has it's own libraries lying around, and nobody cares that the versions are outdated, unmaintained and have more holes than a Swiss Cheese.
Eike 13 hours ago
The alternative is to just not do it and pretend this is a defensible position. I don't think "but having my OS actually run software is hard and users who insist on it are being unrealistic" is a defensible technical position.
"I'm not going to do this in my free time; it's no fun" is an understandable position, though...
Last edited by Eike on 3 Jul 2025 at 6:50 am UTC
How to play games from GOG and Epic Games on Linux, SteamOS and Steam Deck
How to get Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4 online working on Linux, SteamOS, Steam Deck