Re: Y2038 - best way forward in Debian?
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 12:01:28PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>On Feb 11, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>> I agree that changing the i386 port is probably a bad idea at the moment,
>> let's see how the armhf port turns out and fix all the bugs first, as this
>> is clearly needed anyway. Once there is a working armhf version with
>> full time64 user space, there can be a separate discussion about what
>> to do with the i386 port (phase out i386 before y2038, migrate all of
>> i386 to time64 quickly, have two separate i386 ports, or something
>> else).
>I have still not seen any explanation about why we expect that 32 bit
>ARM systems will still be popular (as non-embedded) ~15 years from now.
That's a fair question to ask!
We're already seeing quite a number of people embedding small-ish
ARMv7 boards in infrastructure, and AIUI a lot of them are using
Debian as a base already - see the Civil Infrastructure Platform as an
example: https://www.cip-project.org/
As these people are already engaging in ELTS work, I don't expect that
this setup is going to go away any time soon.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
You raise the blade, you make the change... You re-arrange me 'til I'm sane...
Reply to: