Thinking of installing on a old P3/256mb system to make it useful again. Certainly would like binary packages there. maanantaina 14. elokuuta 2023 klo 22.03.10 UTC+3 Alexander Schreiber <a...@thangorodrim.ch> kirjoitti: On Sun, Aug 13, 2023 at 08:32:20AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > In contemplating bulk builds and resources, I wonder if there are still > people who: > > are running NetBSD/i386 (as opposed to amd64)
yes: NetBSD <machine> 9.3 NetBSD 9.3 (<MACHINE>) #3: Wed Aug 17 18:46:46 UTC 2022 root@<machine>:/usr/obj/sys/arch/i386/compile/<MACHINE> i386 > > are using the binary packges from quarterly branches on ftp.netbsd.org Nope, what little I need I have the patience to build locally. > are running NetBSD 10 already, or who intend to move to it soon or > after release > > If you have a system that meets the above, please either reply here (the > first few people :-) or just answer me privately. (I'd also be > interested in which category below your use is.) > > Basically, I would think about not doing bulk builds if very few want > them, relative to the effort/resources required to create them. > > > My guess is that at this point, i386 use is limited to > > a) old embedded-type systems (soekris) PCEngines Alix, running on Geode LX800. > b) systems that are running i386 because they were first installed many > years ago and haven't been converted to amd64 for no good reason or > for some odd special case odd reason The Alix was what I had available when I built the system and it is still perfectly fast enough (gateway/firewall for a commercial VOiP device). > c) build systems to support category a/b systems, for testing or > building private binary package sets Was/is also used for testing pkgsrc packages as it is the only 32bit NetBSD machine I have (all others are 64bit). That was how I found that current GlusterFs doesn't support 32bit anymore. Kind regards, Alex. -- "Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison
