[lubuntu-users] dropping i386/PPC (was: Re: [lubuntu-devel] State of PPC)

Nio Wiklund nio.wiklund at gmail.com
Thu Nov 17 05:36:19 UTC 2016

[continuing top posting]

Hi everybody,

1. I think that we should keep making the current 32-bit versions alias 
'i386' (with i686 kernels) of Lubuntu, Ubuntu Server, mini.iso and the 
other flavours that want to keep it.

I agree with Aere's arguments (near the end of this mail).

2. I can understand and accept that PowerPC support will end.

Best regards

Den 2016-11-16 kl. 23:58, skrev Walter Lapchynski:
> Aere: I think what Ubuntu is discussing is removing i386/x86/32-bit,
> i.e. going all amd64/x64/64-bit. And yes, it would very negatively
> impact many Lubuntu users as well as the goals of the Lubuntu project as
> a whole.
> Unfortunately, I was not able to make it to the session. For those of us
> in the same boat, here's some links:
>  * YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXzYG4d7poQ
>  * EtherPad: http://pad.ubuntu.com/uos-1611-architecture-discussions
>  * IRC: https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2016/11/16/%23ubuntu-uos-core.html#t14:55
> The majority of this conversation concerned PPC. I think the long answer
> is there are some rather annoying endian bugs and a yaboot issue that no
> one currently supporting PPC (Lubuntu, Ubuntu MATE, Ubuntu Server) has
> the resources to deal with. Not to mention upstream. I'll let those
> leading the discussion (cc'd) confirm this, but it sounds like by when
> support for existing PPC releases end, it will be time to stop providing
> any sort of PPC images.
> As far as my perspective is concerned, I'm perfectly happy with dropping
> PPC. It makes me sad. PPC brought me to the Lubuntu community. However,
> it becomes increasingly harder to make PPC users happy. The successes
> that we have had in recent times are largely by accident. Neither
> Lubuntu nor Ubuntu MATE have the resources to support PPC. It does sound
> like Ubuntu Server will be dropping PPC. I think it only makes sense for
> us to follow suit.
> Apparently, there are plans in place to evaluate the health of the PPC
> port during the Z cycle and so a decision on removing PPC from the
> archives will likely come in 6 months time. Even then, it sounds like
> that's going to be a temporary delay to PPC's inevitable removal.
> Turning to x86, one of the things that was brought up in this discussion
> was limited support for x86 among browsers. Chrome (and yes, upstream
> Chromium) dropped support for it entirely. Firefox continues to provide
> x86 support though there is [some talk][1] about removing support for
> some CPU extensions which could affect a small subset of x86 users.
> Probably not a big issue. Suffice it to say, this seems to be a moot issue.
> However, there was some discussion about the fact that since the vast
> majority of new machines are x86_64, much in the way of development and
> QA (even upstream) has been done on x86_64, and as such x86 bugs are
> popping up that were not otherwise being noticed.
> Ubuntu has moved x86 download links to alternate downloads, so you have
> to actually hunt for them. Apparently, there's not a lot of backlash on
> this. Of course, we all know Unity isn't exactly all that usable on
> these vintage of machines.
> One thing I'm happy to hear is that no one's talking about removing x86
> outside of Ubuntu Desktop and Server (nothing definitive yet). It
> doesn't sound like it's going to be removed from the archives. The
> feeling appears that it's well supported upstream. That said, it's on
> the shoulders of flavors to decide on what to do.
> [1]: https://chuttenblog.wordpress.com/2016/02/10/sse2-support-in-firefox-users/
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Aere Greenway
> <Aere at dvorak-keyboards.com <mailto:Aere at dvorak-keyboards.com>> wrote:
>     On 11/16/2016 05:45 AM, Julien Lavergne wrote:
>         2016-11-14 21:36 GMT+01:00 Walter Lapchynski <wxl at ubuntu.com
>         <mailto:wxl at ubuntu.com>>:
>             It should be pointed out that this discussion is not only
>             about PPC but it's
>             also about i386. Since i386 is a major target of Lubuntu, I
>             would advise
>             attendance.
>         I'm woking this day, so I will not be able to attempt :-(
>         However, dropping i386 will be a very bad signal for our users. It
>         will be difficult to maintain the fact that Lubuntu is for old
>         computers if this kind of support is dropped ...
>         Regards,
>         Julien Lavergne
>     Walter & Julien:
>     What is meant by the proposal of "dropping i386"?
>     Does it mean dropping all 32-bit machines (as 'i386' in Debian
>     packages would imply)?
>     If so, I think that would be a very extreme, draconian thing to do.
>     In my particular case, it would mean that seven of the machines in
>     my test-bed would have to be consigned to the junk-heap.
>     If it affects me this drastically, I'm sure it will negatively
>     impact a lot of other users.
>     Even if a machine can run 64-bit, if it doesn't have a lot of
>     memory, I will use the i386 version of the OS, because it uses the
>     limited memory better, and requires measurably less memory for the OS.
>     If, on the other hand, 'dropping i386' means removing support for
>     Intel-based machines that don't have support of certain
>     machine-instructions, it would be less of an impact (probably two
>     machines in my test-bed to be junked), but I would also loose the
>     ability to test with minimum machines because of that.
>     I am unable to test with virtual box machines because virtual box
>     introduces too much latency (delay between pressing a key and
>     hearing the sound).
>     --
>     Sincerely,
>     Aere
> --
>        @wxl | polka.bike
> C563 CAC5 8BE1 2F22 A49D
> 68F6 8B57 A48B C4F2 051A

More information about the Lubuntu-users mailing list