2015-09-28 23:34 Josh Triplett:
Ben Hutchings wrote:
We propose to drop support for i386 processors older than 686-class in
the current release cycle. This would include folding libc6-i686 into
libc6, changing the default target for gcc, and changing the 586 kernel
flavour to 686 (non-PAE).
Since the 686-class, introduced with the Pentium Pro, is now almost 20
years old, we believe there are few Debian systems still running that
have 586-class or hybrid processors. The only such processors
apparently still available for sale are the DM&P Vortex86 family, Intel
Quark and Xeon Phi, of which we currently only support the Vortex86.
Debian i386 currently works just fine on Quark processors; the only
special support required for Quark lives in the kernel (e.g. handling an
MSR that the Pentium had but Quark doesn't), and the Linux kernel
already has that support. Please don't break that. While people
building a production system for Quark may well build a custom embedded
installation image, it's extremely useful to be able to boot a "stock"
Debian installation or live distribution on a Quark board.
Many distributions have already dropped that support, making it all the
more valuable that Debian hasn't. I can certainly understand dropping
i386 and i486, but i586 remains useful today precisely because of Quark.
Deprecating old systems that don't get built anymore would seem
perfectly reasonable; however, people buy these systems new today, and
will continue to do so in the future.
Maybe it would be a good idea to split the architectures, and have one
port for legacy-but-still-sold-or-useful i386 and move the current i386
to only support newer, common-use i686 hardware. If Xeon Phi can be
accomodated in the legacy architecture as well, great.
Maybe there are not enough volunteers for the port, or none at all; but
at least getting machines shouldn't be a big problem compared to other
arches if current i686/amd64 systems can be used to compile targetting
those older instruction sets.
(I am not volunteering by the way, I have no interest in these ports,
just proposing it as a possible solution).
In a way, most people using i386 in the desktop nowadays could use x32,
but I seem to remember that in practice it still has many problems and
out-of-date or missing packages (I don't know if just because of being
understaffed, or deeper problems like many packages needing upstream
support). Or these people also could move to amd64, but well... if they
haven't moved yet...
It also seems reasonable for certain classes of packages to not bother
with i586 support, such as office suites, desktop environments,
graphical web browsers, media libraries, and anything depending on a
GUI. (Ideally, some obvious mechanism would exist to distinguish those
packages, so that the package manager would prevent the installation of
packages that will SIGILL.)
This is probably easier to achive with a port as well, excluding
undesided packages.
Cheers.
--
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <m...@gmx.pt>
