Re: Illegal Instruction Using sudo in Bookworm on i686

2024-06-09 Thread Marc Haber
On Sun, 09 Jun 2024 20:39:27 -0500, r...@neoquasar.org wrote: >Based on these NEW i686-class systems being available, are people more willing >to spend the time to support them, knowing that the code will be used on >hardware still supported by its manufacturer, still under warranty, still in >p

Re: Suggestions about i386 support

2024-06-09 Thread Andrey Rakhmatullin
On Sun, Jun 09, 2024 at 08:39:27PM -0500, r...@neoquasar.org wrote: > >> It's not just a matter of "buy something better." That's easy.  > > >Indeed, that is easier and cheaper. > > Of course, continuing to use a system I already have is cheaper still. > > > What's not easy is that a) that adds

Re: Suggestions about i386 support

2024-06-09 Thread rhys
>> It's not just a matter of "buy something better." That's easy.  >Indeed, that is easier and cheaper. Of course, continuing to use a system I already have is cheaper still. > What's not easy is that a) that adds another machine to the waste > stream, instead of continuing to get use from it

Re: Illegal Instruction Using sudo in Bookworm on i686

2024-06-09 Thread rhys
> Or is Debian going to continue to support this processor, since it is still > apparently a viable product, enough that new systems are using it? Considering the plans for i386 I don't think it makes sense to even ask this question? Of course it makes sense to ask. The plans are based on a fau

Bug#1072900: ITP: qt6-quickeffectmaker -- Qt 6 Quick Effect Maker

2024-06-09 Thread Aaron Rainbolt
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Aaron Rainbolt X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, arraybo...@gmail.com * Package name    : qt6-quickeffectmaker   Version : 6.6.2   Upstream Contact: Debian Qt/KDE Maintainers * URL : https://www.qt.io/developers/ * License

Re: Suggestions about i386 support

2024-06-09 Thread Ansgar 🙀
Hi, On Sun, 2024-06-09 at 08:58 -0500, r...@neoquasar.org wrote: > What it is is functional, and paid for. And likely, already installed > and in use somewhere (like all of my 32-bit systems).  > > It's not just a matter of "buy something better." That's easy.  Indeed, that is easier and cheaper

Re: Suggestions about i386 support

2024-06-09 Thread rhys
Characterizing it as "ancient" intentionally misses the point.  What it is is functional, and paid for. And likely, already installed and in use somewhere (like all of my 32-bit systems).  It's not just a matter of "buy something better." That's easy.  What's not easy is that a) that adds anoth

Re: Illegal Instruction Using sudo in Bookworm on i686

2024-06-09 Thread Andrey Rakhmatullin
On Sun, Jun 09, 2024 at 06:56:00AM -0500, rhys wrote: > The question right now is: Is this processor supported at all? No. > So given that these no longer fit the "old and busted" description, is Debian > going to stick with the decision to not support them? I'm sure we will, yes, though I'm not

Re: Illegal Instruction Using sudo in Bookworm on i686

2024-06-09 Thread rhys
> On Jun 9, 2024, at 03:02, Marc Haber wrote: > > On Sat, 08 Jun 2024 07:25:49 +, Laszlo Merenyi > wrote: >> I was able to make sudo (and visudo) executable working on this CPU, by >> recompiling the sudo-1.9.15p5 source code package on the target with >> manually removed "-fcf_protecti

Re: Illegal Instruction Using sudo in Bookworm on i686

2024-06-09 Thread Marc Haber
On Sat, 08 Jun 2024 07:25:49 +, Laszlo Merenyi wrote: >I was able to make sudo (and visudo) executable working on this CPU, by >recompiling the sudo-1.9.15p5 source code package on the target with manually >removed "-fcf_protection" hardening option. > >I did not yet met any other program in