<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body><div>Would it be possible to compile 32bit versions of digiKam 6+ at all? If it is possible but is too much work it might worth to try compiling 32bit version once in a while, e.g. 6.0.0. and then 6.9.0 or whichever is the last version in 6 series.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div id="composer_signature"><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757" dir="auto">Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.</div></div><div><br></div><div style="font-size:100%;color:#000000"><!-- originalMessage --><div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Dan Kaczor <djkarch@djkarch.com> </div><div>Date: 2018-04-01 1:26 PM (GMT-07:00) </div><div>To: digikam-users@kde.org </div><div>Subject: [digiKam-users] The future of 6.0.0 bundles and C++11 support... </div><div><br></div></div>Among the many reasons some of us have switched from Windows to Linux <br>was the ability to preserve older investments in computer hardware. We <br>have 6 computers currently in the house, only 2 are Windows, 1 is a <br>laptop with Windows x64. The other 4 computers are running 32 bit Linux <br>of various OS's. We also get donated old computers from people. We make <br>some simple refurbishments, install Linux (usually Mint 17+ or 18) and <br>put Digikam on all of them then give them to families and the elderly <br>who cannot afford computers.<br><br>So I vote not to drop Digikam 32 bits. Otherwise we will stop updating <br>Digikam at whatever version 32 bits support is ended.<br><br>Dan<br>Using Digikam since 2.5 (I think)<br><br><br></body></html>