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

Fritz Hudnut este.el.paz at gmail.com
Mon Jul 17 19:55:52 UTC 2017


Also posting from above:

Not sure why these posts from 2016 came out in recent digest, but I would
support Nio & Aere's request for continuing to support i386 development, in
comparison to PPC, where it might be said that there aren't that many
machines, I would assume that there are quite a few extant PC's that are
still being used . . . around the world, and so having access to a
supported OS should be "viable" and therefore, helpful . . . .

F

>
> [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
> Nio
>
> 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
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/lubuntu-users/attachments/20170717/2fa15e6e/attachment.html>


More information about the Lubuntu-users mailing list