[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Dropping/splitting (proper) i386 support

Neil Roeth writes:
> Nice summary.

> > * Drop i386 support mostly.  'i386' architecture becomes 'i486'.
> > Start a 'Debian-real-i386' subproject, with a 'real-i386' architecture,
> > but don't require that any packages build on it in order to go into 
> > testing or to release Debian; it would be a bonus architecture, with
> > a limited number of packages avaiable.
> > 
> > This seems to be the most immediately feasible option.  Several people 
> > have already indicated their approval of this idea.  I wouldn't wait for 
> > sarge to release, but do it ASAP. (Since C++ is already semi-broken on 
> > 386s, this would likely make things better for i386 in fact; at least 
> > it would have a specific functioning project.)
> > 
> > This is assuming someone with a real i386 is willing to lead a
> > 'Debian-real-i386' project (which wouldn't be a huge amount of work,
> > really; upstream support is usually pretty good, you don't have to actually
> > compile packages on your slow 386, just test them there, and you don't have
> > to worry about ABI compatibility with anyone much).  If nobody is willing
> > then I'd say there just isn't enough support and 386 should be dropped
> > outright.
> I am in favor of dropping the 386 altogether, but this is acceptable as an
> alternative.  If people would rather work on keeping 386 software up to date
> than just run woody forever, more power to them.  It doesn't seem like it
> would cost much on anyone else's part to enable this.

What are the steps to be taken to move to i486-linux? Has this to be
decided on debian-policy?

Would it be ok to drop i386-linux until somebody starts it again?


Reply to: