On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 05:46:26PM +, Simon McVittie wrote:
>...
> I think it's necessary to consider what the purpose of the i386 port is,
> and set expectations and an appropriate baseline based on that.
>
> I see two possible use-cases for i386:
>
> 1. It's a compatibility layer for legacy
On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 at 18:09:02 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> 3. Computers that do support MMX and SSE2, but do not support 64bit.
Right, that's basically the second use-case I mentioned, but moving the
boundary for what we do and don't support to be more modern. We could
put the boundary anywhere w
Then there was the short netbook boom, but AFAIR some early ones
had 64bit CPUs but 32bit-only firmware.
My memory is that at the height of the boom the dominant processors
were the N270 and N280, which are 32-bit only. By the time 64-bit
netbook processors showed up the boom was on the dec
Hi all,
As someone who runs amd64/i386 multiarch, this statement from Adrian:
> i386 hardware is so numerous and widely spread, that every tiny fraction
> of i386 users might be more users than half of our release architectures
> combined. It is not even clear whether this is just an exaggeration
4 matches
Mail list logo
