Re: MySql broken on older 486 and other cpuid less CPUs. Does this qualify as RC?
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 06:59:16PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> > In practical terms, it seems to me that part of the fix here should really
> > be to declare that we don't officially support 486 CPUs anymore, since no
> > one who is using one was involved enough in the etch release to have
> > documented this bug as RC until three days before release. :P
> My 486 actually does a useful job, and hence usually runs pure stable.
> I figured I would upgrade it to see if anything broken, and boy did it
> ever break. It is a good old reliable machine and the only 486 I have.
> I guess loosing proftpd and php isn't the worst things that can happen,
> although I do like my ftp server to work, as well as my web server. At
> least I know have a fixed version installed so my machine works.
> Maybe I am the only person left with a 486 doing useful work, but it has
> run problem free for 15 years now and shows no signs of giving any.
> Hopefully I will replace the 486 with a ppro in the next few months, in
> which case the 486 will become available for me to just do tests on and
> other experiments.
Well, on that subject c.f.
<http://lists.debian.org/debian-alpha/2007/04/msg00002.html>. :)
> Is there any good reason 486s should not be supproted anymore? I know
> why 386s are not supported anymore.
Like I said, in practical terms, if a bug like this in a major server
package goes unnoticed until 3 days before the release, we are not actually
"supporting" 486. We support the i386 architecture quite well, but it seems
only honest to admit that as a project, we don't care about 486 enough to
even get 486-specific problems marked as RC in time to do anything about
them for a release.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: