On Sun, Nov 24, 2024, at 6:23 PM, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi, > > On 11/24/24 17:22, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: >> 5. If we're moving hardware baselines for the sake of Rust (or any other >> software on this architecture) it's already too late. > > Huh? Why? > > [Putting my Release Team hat off] Personally I think Debian should be > raising the baseline for i386. I'm not sure about to which level, but > I've seen proposals in this thread. > > Given that > 1) we're no longer supporting i386 as a full architecture (no kernel, no > installer, only in chroots or as multiarch) > 2) we don't clearly have i386 porters > maybe we should seek consensus in this thread and go with that. > > [Release Team hat on] I would take consensus for a decision on the topic.
been a month and a half now, with only pro voices in response to this (although not that many). how do we (want to) proceed? is this just a matter of the release time deciding that the baseline has been raised and communicating that, or is there some formal process involved (i.e., should I file a bug somewhere with a concrete baseline proposal?)? the next rustc release is in 6 days, the one after (which I also very much would like to land in Trixie, freeze timeline and policies permitting ;)) 6 weeks after that. if the baseline is raised I'd drop the corresponding patches in rustc (I already did a test build of 1.83 and don't expect any immediate issues there), but the sooner I can do that the more time we have to handle fallout on the crate packages side (which is mostly dropping patches as well, since upstream normally conforms to stock semantics, and not to the Debian i386 ones). thanks for your consideration! Fabian
