I'm running Arch i686 on thinkpad T400, although it's x86_64 compatible, but it will be painful to reinstall. And I think there might be many people don't have x64 hardware. -- Best regards, Li Ye

On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 22:58, Chris Leng wrote:

err... I have to say, at the very beginning, the reason why I chose Arch was my old hardware: P4 2.0G (32bit) and 512MB DDR RAM. If i686 support was drooped someday, how about my old computer? I cannot cast it, however.

I think that x86_64 is the way to go. We need to start making the transition sooner rather than later. I don't see what could be a reasonable reason for staying with i686 for much longer. We have x86_64 support in Java and Flash. For the applications that cannot make the transition as quickly, we have a transparent translation 32bit -> 64bit layer. In summary, let's move on up (to x86_64). -- Sincerely, Antony Jepson / / GPG Key: 0xFA10ED80

Wondering why nobody is this thread mentions that today is 1st April.. LOL..

On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 01:17:47 -0300 "Cesar G. Miguel" wrote:

...

Wondering why nobody is this thread mentions that today is 1st April.. LOL..

It depends on where you live to be April 1st :-)

Let's drop the support for Google [1], Firefox and, of course, Arch i686 :-)

Happy Apr, 1st!

[1] Considering it's been in beta stage since always.

Why should we support google in the first place? I think it would rather be our duty to purge it from any app we can, like firefox. I know that it requires significant effort to get rid of googles spy functionality in firefox and probably other apps as well, but considering the danger google poses this is necessary.

Guys ... this is no joke. I'm just glad there are other distros out there (and superior ones really, like Mandrake) that still support x86. I wouldn't be surprised if AMD money is behind this, now that they are losing their x86 license from Intel. On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:21 AM, Thomas Bohn wrote:

On 2009-04-01 12:11 +0800, Abdul Halim wrote:

...

Wondering why nobody is this thread mentions that today is 1st April.. LOL..

Damn, I thought we would play along until April 1 is over. You ruined everything!

Thank you very much.

Thomas

P.S. Yeah, I fall for the joke completely.

I have just bought a computer magazine "World of Computers", which is very popular and good in Serbia. They are writing that AMD has signed agreements with several most innovative Linux distributions about dropping support for x86. There is also a text about number of good sides of this agreement, since this will be push in the back for 64 bit computing. This magazine is very solid and popular, and they would not make a joke about it. I am collecting this magazine for almost 6 years. So I also thing this is a great idea! -- Nebojša Stričević www.strika.info

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Abdul Halim wrote:

Wondering why nobody is this thread mentions that today is 1st April.. LOL..

I hope it's true just for the 1st april, b'coz if arch really dropped the i686 support how about all people that using computer in my country? Mostly we use an old computer b'coz of our lack of buying power. Even not much of us using arch but i personally think it's quite unfortunate if this thing really happens. So please tell me that this is just an april mop :-( -- Muhammad Bayu RameTux | rmTx Javan IT Services -- http://www.javan.web.id http://www.muhammadbayu.com (--under heavy construction -:-)

On Wed, April 1, 2009 10:09, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

This was posted in march. And it's discussed on the developer mailing list and voted for. Personally I also agree they made a good choice.

Okay, what is the alternative? Especially if you don't want end up with Debian-based distributions? Thomas

On Wednesday 01 April 2009 14:01:14 Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

...

Okay, what is the alternative? Especially if you don't want end up with Debian-based distributions?

Slackware :)

How do you mean alternative? there is no need for alternatives because the decision was only made because we all agreed pretty much everyone is using 64bit now anyway.

Well.. I have a ancient dos based software I have to use and it does not work in virualbox/freedos, dosemu and dosbox. it crashes on all of them. Currently I have it running on a slackware machine where it works with in dosemu. Looks like I have to get slackware in virtualbox and run dosemu within it. :) -- Shridhar

On Wed, April 1, 2009 10:31, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

How do you mean alternative? there is no need for alternatives because the decision was only made because we all agreed pretty much everyone is using 64bit now anyway.

I doubt that, besides I'm currently using Arch on my eeePC and even if I get a new (64 bits) computer anytime soon, I won't maintain two different distro on both computers. So I'm looking for a new distro to replace Arch.

For atom-based mobile devices you could use android or something.

Adroid doesn't seem ready for netbook use yet. This might change but I don't think that I will get my current workflow working on Android. Thomas

-----Original Message-----

Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:53:59 +0200 Subject: Re: [arch-general] [Fwd: [arch-announce] Dropping i686 support] From: "Leslie P. Polzer" To: "General Discusson about Arch Linux"

...

I doubt that, besides I'm currently using Arch on my eeePC and even if I get a new (64 bits) computer anytime soon, I won't maintain two different distro on both computers. So I'm looking for a new distro to replace Arch.

Yeah, you better do.

It's about time the obsolete i686 branch vanished. Everyone who's still wanting it must be a weenie, and there's no place for those in the Arch philosophy -- go try Redhat or something.

My 2 cents.

Leslie

-- LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/polzer Xing Profile: https://www.xing.com/profile/LeslieP_Polzer Blog: http://blog.viridian-project.de/

Please think of poor countries and people living there. Are they all weenies?

2009/4/1 kludge :

...

...

Yeah, you better do.

It's about time the obsolete i686 branch vanished. Everyone who's still wanting it must be a weenie, and there's no place for those in the Arch philosophy -- go try Redhat or something.

My 2 cents.

Leslie

-- LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/polzer Xing Profile: https://www.xing.com/profile/LeslieP_Polzer Blog: http://blog.viridian-project.de/

Please think of poor countries and people living there. Are they all weenies?

leslie:  fuck you and your macho-nerd, myth-of-progress bullshit.

all the rest:  i'm really upset with this decision.  the basic assumption that anyone who matters is spending money on new hardware is fucked-up.

i love my computer, and i love archlinux.  having made the rounds from debian to ubuntu to lfs to gentoo, arch offers the perfect balance of customizeability, low-level control, and binary-package convenience.

but several years ago, i made the conscious and principled choice to *not* buy new hardware.  i don't want to start an argument about it, just state that the costs to me and the world (economic and environmental) of running the latest-model rat race is not worth it.

so a distro that let's me keep my system this stream-lined is perfect. my main box is a thinkpad a21m (p3 800 mhz, 512 mb ram, nine years old) and it does everything i need it to do because it doesn't do anything i don't want it to do.  and that's thanks to arch.  i *know* i'm not the only one who values arch *specifically* because its simplicity and felixibility prove that old does not mean obsolete.

so, sure i could go abs and compile everything, but the reason i quit gentoo and lfs is that neither i nor my computer have the available cycles for that.

i've been running linux exclusively for the last seven years, and arch is the first distro i've used that i've felt any real love or loyalty for.  it's the first distro, with its attendant community, that's inspired me to kick back and contribute.  it's taught me an enormous amount, and much of what i've learned i've learned specifically so i can  contribute back to the community.

it's distressing that a change this monumental happened apparently without any consultation with the community-at-large.  maybe it ain't a rational response, but i feel a bit betrayed.

i haven't got the technical expertise or time to make spear-head it, but i would definitely throw down on maintaining i686 packages in a community-managed repo.  are there other archers out there who don't feel like (or can't) buy new hardware just because the developers claim we're obsolete?  let's organize.

-kludge

Hey!!!!!!!!!!!!! -Binky to the rescue- There is a nice solution posted on the forums: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=526660#p526660 So, there is a hope for you 32-bit users =] And relax :D PS: Of course I use x86_64

kludge wrote:

...

...

Yeah, you better do.

It's about time the obsolete i686 branch vanished. Everyone who's still wanting it must be a weenie, and there's no place for those in the Arch philosophy -- go try Redhat or something.

My 2 cents.

Leslie

-- LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/polzer Xing Profile: https://www.xing.com/profile/LeslieP_Polzer Blog: http://blog.viridian-project.de/

Please think of poor countries and people living there. Are they all weenies?

leslie: fuck you and your macho-nerd, myth-of-progress bullshit.

all the rest: i'm really upset with this decision. the basic assumption that anyone who matters is spending money on new hardware is fucked-up.

i love my computer, and i love archlinux. having made the rounds from debian to ubuntu to lfs to gentoo, arch offers the perfect balance of customizeability, low-level control, and binary-package convenience.

but several years ago, i made the conscious and principled choice to *not* buy new hardware. i don't want to start an argument about it, just state that the costs to me and the world (economic and environmental) of running the latest-model rat race is not worth it.

so a distro that let's me keep my system this stream-lined is perfect. my main box is a thinkpad a21m (p3 800 mhz, 512 mb ram, nine years old) and it does everything i need it to do because it doesn't do anything i don't want it to do. and that's thanks to arch. i *know* i'm not the only one who values arch *specifically* because its simplicity and felixibility prove that old does not mean obsolete.

so, sure i could go abs and compile everything, but the reason i quit gentoo and lfs is that neither i nor my computer have the available cycles for that.

i've been running linux exclusively for the last seven years, and arch is the first distro i've used that i've felt any real love or loyalty for. it's the first distro, with its attendant community, that's inspired me to kick back and contribute. it's taught me an enormous amount, and much of what i've learned i've learned specifically so i can contribute back to the community.

it's distressing that a change this monumental happened apparently without any consultation with the community-at-large. maybe it ain't a rational response, but i feel a bit betrayed.

i haven't got the technical expertise or time to make spear-head it, but i would definitely throw down on maintaining i686 packages in a community-managed repo. are there other archers out there who don't feel like (or can't) buy new hardware just because the developers claim we're obsolete? let's organize.

-kludge

i know there are a few hours left, but may i ROFL now, please? xDDD

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 2:35 PM, kludge wrote:

...

...

Yeah, you better do.

It's about time the obsolete i686 branch vanished. Everyone who's still wanting it must be a weenie, and there's no place for those in the Arch philosophy -- go try Redhat or something.

My 2 cents.

Leslie

-- LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/polzer Xing Profile: https://www.xing.com/profile/LeslieP_Polzer Blog: http://blog.viridian-project.de/

Please think of poor countries and people living there. Are they all weenies?

leslie:  fuck you and your macho-nerd, myth-of-progress bullshit.

all the rest:  i'm really upset with this decision.  the basic assumption that anyone who matters is spending money on new hardware is fucked-up.

i love my computer, and i love archlinux.  having made the rounds from debian to ubuntu to lfs to gentoo, arch offers the perfect balance of customizeability, low-level control, and binary-package convenience.

but several years ago, i made the conscious and principled choice to *not* buy new hardware.  i don't want to start an argument about it, just state that the costs to me and the world (economic and environmental) of running the latest-model rat race is not worth it.

so a distro that let's me keep my system this stream-lined is perfect. my main box is a thinkpad a21m (p3 800 mhz, 512 mb ram, nine years old) and it does everything i need it to do because it doesn't do anything i don't want it to do.  and that's thanks to arch.  i *know* i'm not the only one who values arch *specifically* because its simplicity and felixibility prove that old does not mean obsolete.

so, sure i could go abs and compile everything, but the reason i quit gentoo and lfs is that neither i nor my computer have the available cycles for that.

i've been running linux exclusively for the last seven years, and arch is the first distro i've used that i've felt any real love or loyalty for.  it's the first distro, with its attendant community, that's inspired me to kick back and contribute.  it's taught me an enormous amount, and much of what i've learned i've learned specifically so i can  contribute back to the community.

it's distressing that a change this monumental happened apparently without any consultation with the community-at-large.  maybe it ain't a rational response, but i feel a bit betrayed.

i haven't got the technical expertise or time to make spear-head it, but i would definitely throw down on maintaining i686 packages in a community-managed repo.  are there other archers out there who don't feel like (or can't) buy new hardware just because the developers claim we're obsolete?  let's organize.

-kludge

Yeesh... date +"%m %d"

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Johannes Held wrote:

I mean, every year - arch comes up with a good joke for fools day. Many people notice the joke and keep on playing.. But other.. ruggish words and bad replys occurs on our maillinglists..

THAT is exactly the funny part! -- ------------------------------------------- Denis A. Altoe Falqueto ------------------------------------------- Fran Lebowitz - "Life is something to do when you can't get to sleep."

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Johannes Held wrote:

Denis A. Altoé Falqueto :

...

THAT is exactly the funny part! Jap, that's for sure.

But as I mentioned, the line between the funny part and insulting is very thin.

-- Gruß, Johannes Täglich http://blog.hehejo.de und du fühlst dich gut.

http://cryptocd.eduforge.org/online_version

Sure, you are right. But those running the prank are very aware of that too :) I think they are realy expecting that. I'm sure that it would not be the same without those overreactions. -- ------------------------------------------- Denis A. Altoe Falqueto ------------------------------------------- Bob Hope - "You know you are getting old when the candles cost more than the cake."

On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 17:55:27 -0300 Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Johannes Held wrote:

...

Denis A. Altoé Falqueto :

...

THAT is exactly the funny part! Jap, that's for sure.

But as I mentioned, the line between the funny part and insulting is very thin.

-- Gruß, Johannes Täglich http://blog.hehejo.de und du fühlst dich gut.

http://cryptocd.eduforge.org/online_version

Sure, you are right. But those running the prank are very aware of that too :) I think they are realy expecting that. I'm sure that it would not be the same without those overreactions.

Hey seriously now... Let's drop i686. No, really. Dieter

Yup, I quite agree with you. I was fooled and even reinstalled x86_64, because I never reminded that I was using a 64bit CPU! I love arch's simplicity as it defines (plus funny as the forum has just shown to me), this is my first fool's day with Arch, but I'm really looking forward to the next! I bet I won't be fooled anymore! #_# Aha.... 2009/4/2 Nebojša Stričević :

I just have to add that I definitely decided to stay with Arch exactly one year ago, when I saw that the German thing was a joke! I stoped downloading FreeBSD and my frustration just went away... Those who fools me that big earn my full trust. And I am still here...

-- Best regards, Li Ye

On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 02:35:34PM -0500, kludge wrote:

...

...

Yeah, you better do.

It's about time the obsolete i686 branch vanished. Everyone who's still wanting it must be a weenie, and there's no place for those in the Arch philosophy -- go try Redhat or something.

My 2 cents.

Leslie

-- LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/polzer Xing Profile: https://www.xing.com/profile/LeslieP_Polzer Blog: http://blog.viridian-project.de/

Please think of poor countries and people living there. Are they all weenies?

leslie: fuck you and your macho-nerd, myth-of-progress bullshit.

My April Fool's flamebait is better than yours. :) Leslie

Rafa Grimán wrote:

For x86 based models, I guess we'll have to switch for the time being to another distro, which IMHO isn't too much of an issue. Sooner or later we'll have to switch over to x86-64 based systems since x86 is used on old hardware: hard to get replacements, doesn't scale, less performance, ...

x86_64 is just x86 with more registers with 64 bit address space instead of 32 bit. Architecturally there is not much difference so all the shortcomings of x86 still exist on x86_64. Unfortunately.

On 2009-04-01 13:58 +0200, Rafa Grimán wrote:

IIRC, Atom has the 220 and 330 models which are x86-64 compatible. So there's not much of an issue with Atom.

Well, I don't care about those two, the N270 is most used Atom processor at the moment and neither this one nor the upcoming N280 supports 64 bits. It is that simple.

As Dieter has said, you can think Android or some other distro for x86.

The thing is, I have installed Arch Linux on my eeePC in October, changed and did a lot to make it my system. So I pretty much doubt that I just can switch to another distribution within a week or two. My guess is that x86-64 has far more bugs related to the platform than i686, so the assumption: it compiles on x86-64 so it should compile on i686 is more valid than the other way around. I might be wrong on this but if I'm wrong I like to see the statistics. Thomas P.S. Where is x86-64 really an advantage besides the 2K38 bug?

On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 10:28 +0200, Thomas Bohn wrote:

On Wed, April 1, 2009 10:09, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

...

This was posted in march. And it's discussed on the developer mailing list and voted for. Personally I also agree they made a good choice.

Okay, what is the alternative? Especially if you don't want end up with Debian-based distributions?

a more obvious choice would be to stick with archlinux+ABS, remember we're just dropping BINARY package support, arch's build tools will remain the same, think of it as a less sucky gentoo. cheers..

Thomas

On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 11:29:58 +0200 (CEST) "Thomas Bohn" wrote:

On Wed, April 1, 2009 11:00, M Rawash wrote:

...

a more obvious choice would be to stick with archlinux+ABS, remember we're just dropping BINARY package support, arch's build tools will remain the same, think of it as a less sucky gentoo.

To compile mplayer on my Atom N270 takes forever, I can't imagine to compile X or Firefox on that machine.

Thomas

distcc/crosscompiling etc. you can compile on your 64bit box for 32bit. sounds like a cool project, maintaining some tools and scripts to do that on arch. Xyne has probably already written it. Dieter

chrooting 32 bit did always work with arch64. I had some problems with that one though, and by dropping i686 completely, you'll still need somebody to build all those 32bit packages, or do it yourself On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Abdul Halim wrote:

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

...

On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 11:29:58 +0200 (CEST) "Thomas Bohn" wrote:

...

On Wed, April 1, 2009 11:00, M Rawash wrote:

...

a more obvious choice would be to stick with archlinux+ABS, remember we're just dropping BINARY package support, arch's build tools will remain the same, think of it as a less sucky gentoo.

To compile mplayer on my Atom N270 takes forever, I can't imagine to compile X or Firefox on that machine.

Thomas

distcc/crosscompiling etc. you can compile on your 64bit box for 32bit.

Is there a chroot to 32bit from 64bit host in Arch? I guess it is time to do so. How am I gonna run my skype and wine application? :-)

...

sounds like a cool project, maintaining some tools and scripts to do that on arch. Xyne has probably already written it.

Dieter

Abdul Halim wrote:

Wondering why nobody is this thread mentions that today is 1st April.. LOL..

Doh! Cause I received the email on March 31! DR