We are talking about i686 vs i386, not about AMD64. i686 has almost
every x86 processor since 1996 I think. Thats why I am asking...
For example, ArchLinux is using i686 without andy problems.
Dne 1.5.2013 11:44, Danilo Pianini napsal(a):
Still using it on several systems: three servers and a Minimac (I'm
using it for building a smart pervasive screen).
Don't forget that many systems still exist with decent performance and
no amd64 support, Pentium 4 for instance.
Moreover, I can see many users still download the x86 version (I'm
seeding the torrents). It's not dead at all.
I would wait a few years. In my opinion x86 is still worth the
resources we are dedicating to it.
2013/5/1 Vojtěch Pszczólka <[email protected]>:
Despite of i'm not developing Sabayon, i can't see any reason for maintaining
i386. How looks typical i386 user :-D ?
Wolfden <[email protected]>napsal/a:
I for killing it off too
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 1:42 AM, Ian Whyman <[email protected]> wrote:
As always I am very much pro this.
On 1 May 2013 07:30, "Fabio Erculiani" <[email protected]> wrote:
So, x86_64 is more than 10 years old now, and it's time to think again
about the i686 architecture.
I am proposing to gradually drop support for x86 32bit by the end of
2013 (the "how" would deserve a separate discussion).
Is there any serious reason not to kill 32bit? Maintaining it takes
50% of our resources (time and space) and we could just dedicate some
of them to the other emerging architecture called ARM.
This is just an RFC for now, don't get scared.
Cheers,
--
Fabio Erculiani
--
KJS
~wolfden~
--
Ing. Dott. Danilo Pianini
Site: http://www.danilopianini.org/
Phone: +39 320 41 36 573
Skype: dany.sk
