Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[bcnjr5]

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 05:24:26PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:

The CPU in Raspberry Pi 1 does support some, but not all, new features the
armhf arch requires.  The Raspbian team wanted to get all speedups they can,
and, as for example floating point tasks greatly benefit from armhf's
calling convention -- instead of using fully compatible armel, Raspbian guys
decided to use modified armhf.  This led to massive confusion, breaking any
external repositories compiled for baseline armhf.

Likewise, you can rebuild current unstable with -march=i586, but it'll
break whenever an user takes a binary package from regular Debian or any
other repository not recompiled with -march=i586.


Ah, thanks for the clarification.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[KatolaZ]

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 11:05:08AM -0500, Don Wright wrote:
> Don Wright wrote:
> >I believe the original comment was comparing the soon-to-be unsupported
> >i586 arch to the RPi 1 and 2 which use a variant ARM processor that
> 
> Correction: As Adam noted, only the RPi model 1, Zero and Compute Module
> use the original ARM-based BCM2835 system-on-a-chip. The higher Pi2 and
> Pi3 are reasonably compatible with armhf binaries.
> 

True. I upgraded both a rpi2 and a rpi3 from raspbian to Devuan
armhf. Not a single problem.

HND

KatolaZ

-- 
[ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ --- GLUG Catania -- Freaknet Medialab ]
[ me [at] katolaz.homeunix.net -- http://katolaz.homeunix.net -- ]
[ GNU/Linux User:#325780/ICQ UIN: #258332181/GPG key ID 0B5F062F ]
[ Fingerprint: 8E59 D6AA 445E FDB4 A153 3D5A 5F20 B3AE 0B5F 062F ]
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Don Wright]

Don Wright wrote:
>I believe the original comment was comparing the soon-to-be unsupported
>i586 arch to the RPi 1 and 2 which use a variant ARM processor that

Correction: As Adam noted, only the RPi model 1, Zero and Compute Module
use the original ARM-based BCM2835 system-on-a-chip. The higher Pi2 and
Pi3 are reasonably compatible with armhf binaries.

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Don Wright]

bcn...@gmail.com wrote:

>On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 12:17:31AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
>>Reverting this in a derivative is possible, although it lands you pretty
>>much exactly in Raspbian's position.
>>
>>The result will be one-way compatibility: your packages will run on any
>>Debian-compatible system but importing from Debian or any other external
>>repository will require a rebuild.
>
>Aww crud... What's this about Raspbian?

I believe the original comment was comparing the soon-to-be unsupported
i586 arch to the RPi 1 and 2 which use a variant ARM processor that
falls halfway between the Debian armel and armhf distros. Thus Raspbian
is not compatible with Debian binaries from either arch and must build
and maintain their own packages - as would Devuan if i586 support were
to continue.

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Hendrik Boom]

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 09:27:43AM -0500, Linux O'Beardly wrote:
> Aren't Rasberry Pis configured with ARM procs? If so, would dropping i586
> support have any effect whatsoever on it?

No.  An ARM is not a 586.  It could be one of the debian platforms 
whose name starts with 'arm', of which there are several.  armel? 
armhf? or something like that.  I'm told some of the ARMs are supported 
by platforms that don't use the entire instruction set, thereby wasting 
performance, but at least they do work.

-- hendrik
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Linux O'Beardly]

Aren't Rasberry Pis configured with ARM procs? If so, would dropping i586
support have any effect whatsoever on it?

Linux O'Beardly
@LinuxOBeardly
http://o.beard.ly
linux.obear...@gmail.com

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 8:34 PM,  wrote:

> On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 12:17:31AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
>
>> Reverting this in a derivative is possible, although it lands you pretty
>> much exactly in Raspbian's position.
>>
>> The result will be one-way compatibility: your packages will run on any
>> Debian-compatible system but importing from Debian or any other external
>> repository will require a rebuild.
>>
>
> Aww crud... What's this about Raspbian?
>
> I use a raspberry pi 3 as my general computer now, and it is currently a
> "frankendebian" with packages from both Raspbian and Devuan in order to
> eliminate systemd. (here's the current sources.list:)
>
>deb http://archive.raspberrypi.org/debian/ jessie main ui
>deb http://archive.raspbian.org/raspbian/ jessie main contrib non-free
> rpi
>deb http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/ jessie main contrib
> non-free rpi
>deb http://packages.devuan.org/devuan jessie main contrib non-free
>deb http://packages.devuan.org/merged jessie main contrib non-free
>
> Currently, everything runs fine (graphical, even!), but is there some
> huge incompatibility that's going to bite me later?
>
> ___
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@lists.dyne.org
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
>
>
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Hendrik Boom]

On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 06:04:32AM +, Noel Torres wrote:
> 
> Vince Mulhollon  escribió:
> 
> >It'll hit the embedded world pretty hard.
> >
> >Today you can buy a brand new soekris box that only runs i586.  Brand
> >new off the shelf, today.  My 6 or 7 year old one is running right now
> 
> Very valid points. However, we need to pick our battles. At this
> moment, we have very scarce manpower, and a prime objective: get rid
> of systemd for Jessie (it being usable) and Ascii (completely).

It isn't even likely to impact Jessie, since the problems are only now 
being introduced into sid.  THe responses I see in the bug reports 
suggest to me that Debian will not consider fixing the problem, and is 
dropping 586 altogether.

The question for us, when we start to get serious about ascii, is 
whether we consider this a reasonable approach for our users 
although some of whom seem to still have use for a 586, or whether is 
the same kind of attitude that leads to WONTFIX for numerous systemd 
problems.

Of course we don't need any kind of decision  ontil we get serious 
about ascii, but airing the issue beforehand might inform our decision 
when we finally do get around to it.

-- hendrik

> Adam
> Borowski expressed it way better than I could:
> 
> ==8<==
> Adam Borowski  escribió:
> >Reverting this in a derivative is possible, although it lands you pretty
> >much exactly in Raspbian's position.
> >
> >You'd need to:
> >* reconfigure and rebuild kernel for -585 flavour
> >* undo the not-yet-done merging of libc6-i686
> >* (no source changes) rebuild every package!
> >* watch out for regressions

The main thing I see is that we'd have to use the appropriate flags for 
gcc to generate 586 code instead of 686 code.

But yes, it would involve rebuilding every package.

-- hendrik

> ==8<==
> 
> After that (or even for Ascii), we can broaden our view of "user
> freedom to choose" to other chosings, and i585 would be a good first
> step, but at this moment I (humbly) think it is not worth (even
> being very important).

At this moment, I agree.

> 
> >The root cause of the problem is the Debian/Ubuntu ecosystem is moving
> >away from the "universal OS" mantra and toward being a GNOME
> >bootloader for tablets and everything else can just go away.  Thats
> >the war... abandonment of entire industry sectors or weird init
> >decisions are merely a small battle, the war is the move toward
> >turning the OS into a GNOME bootloader for tablets.

And we'd like to take over the "universal OS" mantle.  When we have the 
resources.

-- hendrik
k
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Noel Torres]

Vince Mulhollon  escribió:


It'll hit the embedded world pretty hard.

Today you can buy a brand new soekris box that only runs i586.  Brand
new off the shelf, today.  My 6 or 7 year old one is running right now


Very valid points. However, we need to pick our battles. At this  
moment, we have very scarce manpower, and a prime objective: get rid  
of systemd for Jessie (it being usable) and Ascii (completely). Adam  
Borowski expressed it way better than I could:


==8<==
Adam Borowski  escribió:

Reverting this in a derivative is possible, although it lands you pretty
much exactly in Raspbian's position.

You'd need to:
* reconfigure and rebuild kernel for -585 flavour
* undo the not-yet-done merging of libc6-i686
* (no source changes) rebuild every package!
* watch out for regressions

==8<==

After that (or even for Ascii), we can broaden our view of "user  
freedom to choose" to other chosings, and i585 would be a good first  
step, but at this moment I (humbly) think it is not worth (even being  
very important).



The root cause of the problem is the Debian/Ubuntu ecosystem is moving
away from the "universal OS" mantra and toward being a GNOME
bootloader for tablets and everything else can just go away.  Thats
the war... abandonment of entire industry sectors or weird init
decisions are merely a small battle, the war is the move toward
turning the OS into a GNOME bootloader for tablets.


Agreed

Regards

Noel
er Envite


binkqTvSgfsqt.bin
Description: Clave PGP pública


pgpfrBXyS_hEx.pgp
Description: Firma digital PGP
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Adam Borowski]

On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 06:22:17PM -0500, Vince Mulhollon wrote:
> It'll hit the embedded world pretty hard.

Sane embedded doesn't run x86.  Heck, even m68k is better than x86 there...

> Today you can buy a brand new soekris box that only runs i586.  Brand
> new off the shelf, today.  My 6 or 7 year old one is running right now
> as an asterisk server at home.  Draws about 5 watts.  Its not exactly
> the newest piece of hardware they sell but its still available as an
> embedded / embeddable device.  It draws about twice the power of a
> rasp-pi, a good solid one amp at 12 volts.
> 
> Its kinda sad because two years ago there were threads on the soekris
> boards about having to move from Ubuntu to Debian when i586 was
> dropped by Ubuntu and now they'll have to move AGAIN just two years
> later to ... something.

Soekris uses Geode, which is 686 save for NOPL.  There's no significant gain
from NOPL, thus Debian is not planning dropping support for Geode at this
time.

There's an open issue that some stuff produces NOPL when configured for 686,
but that's being dealt with (I don't know the exact details).

> The root cause of the problem is the Debian/Ubuntu ecosystem is moving
> away from the "universal OS" mantra

Please take a look at second-class architectures: alpha hppa hurd-i386
kfreebsd-{amd64,i386} m68k mips64el powerpcspe ppc64 sh4 sparc64 x32.

This is where stuff like 586 belongs.  This bunch includes outgoing
architectures that stopped being relevant at 586's time (m68k), at
Pentium 4's time (alpha hppa), possibly incoming but lacking manpower
(mips64el sparc64 x32), flip-flopping because of low manpower (kfreebsd),
niche (ppc64 -- it has a newer mainstream version in first-class),
something ancient but with 100% free hardware coming once patents expire
(sh4) and a joke arch (hurd).

All of these but powerpcspe are currently in mostly working order -- there
are smaller or bigger problems but they generally work.  An architecture
with any users doesn't get dropped unless supporting it becomes hopeless
(ia64).

If you want arch/feature/etc X working... contribute!  This includes not
only coding but also pushing stuff upstream, for many meanings of
"upstream": sometimes kernel, sometimes glibc, sometimes authors of a given
piece of software, sometimes Debian.  Carrying a patchset yourself is not
a viable idea in the long run.

For example, I'm one of porters of x32, which is currently on the list of
second-class architectures.  I'm fighting an uphill battle with some
maintainers who claim that x32 is "useless"; this is why I recently got
access to the NMU stick.  I can't exactly NMU the kernel (vetoed in #778212)
or d-i, but the kernel part requires "just" work, while persuading the d-i
team is a matter of getting the rest of the port in a good enough shape.
All of this is doable, as long as you contribute instead of talking.

Of course, a single person can't possibly get all the needed parts done him-
or herself.  I'll let you a secret: I'm not a Devuan user, nor I really
believe it will gain lots of popularity.  So why am I on this mailing list?
Because I hope that you'll produce by some means (whatever
taking+integrating or coding from scratch) some parts that got broken by the
systemd invasion (mainly policykit/upower/etc), so they can be upstreamed
into Debian.  When that is done, more ambitious projects like vdev would be
nice, too.  But you can't say I'm a freeloader: my nosystemd-jessie/stretch
repository has working packages that you can use now.  That's not a viable
solution long-term as required diffs will grow beyond meager tuits I can put
into their maintenance, though.  That's why I need you to come with a
replacement, be it consolekit2 or whatever else.  Yet having someone like me
waiting to "steal your hard work" is actually important for Devuan: if the
shape of sane inits in Debian degenerates enough to let the systemd crowd
drop them, the resultant droppage of support across 24509 source packages
will be a disaster that'd be hard to recover with your current manpower.

> the war is the move toward turning the OS into a GNOME bootloader for
> tablets.

GNOME doesn't even run on anything but i386 and amd64 (it compiles but fails
on startup).  Since gnome-fallback got dropped, it absolutely needs either
certain OpenGL features (implemented only by nvidia/nouveau (not on arm* or
ppc*), radeon and intel) or llvmpipe (i386 and amd64 only).  GNOME folks
will rush to claim that someone ported gnome-shell to freedreno, but that's
only a hacked version of Fedora, as far as I know not upstreamed, and
certainly not in Debian.  I've repeatedly asked on debian-devel for reports
of anyone who managed to get gnome-shell running on !i386 !amd64, not a
single person stepped up.

Thus, the presence of other architectures as release archs suggests there's
more than just a "Gnome bootloader"...


Meow!
-- 
A tit a day keeps the vet away.
___
Dng mailing 

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Adam Borowski]

On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 06:57:22PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> > Not worth the effort, I'd say.  Jessie still has four years of
> > security support (I don't think Devuan has the manpower to provide
> > security support for 40k+ packages alone after Debian ends it), and
> > if you'd _still_ run that museal machine at that time, you can
> > reconsider.
> 
> We need to pick our battles. I bought a Pentium II, a 686, in 1998.
> That's a little over 18 years ago. The last 32 bit Pentium, the Pentium
> 4, stopped selling in August 2008: That's 8 years ago.

Actually, roughly half of P4 models supported amd64.  I don't know when
i386-only ones stopped being produced, but I assume it was a good time
before 2008.

> And since 2004, you could, and many people did, buy 64 bit machines.  A
> 586 or 32 bit machine is doubtlessly so old that getting one replacement
> part would cost quite enough to just dumpsterize the computer (unless one
> has a basement full of cannibalizable computers).

Actually, there's still a 32-bit P4 running at one of my customers.  A samba
file server -- not something you need a fat machine for.

I do have a 64-bit P4 in my own cellar, doing backups.

But these are P4, not 586.  You can't even attach a non-ancient disk to the
latter, so file serving purposes are out.  A vast majority of uses that
don't need a big disk are better served by a cheap-ass ARM SoC like RPi (if
you want gigabit ethernet, most of RPi's competitors have it).  Electricity
cost difference will pay off that investment in a couple months...

So, the only reason I can fathom for using a 586 is if you have some
specialty hardware with an ancient connector, like an ISA card.  But those
invariably require software of matching age that's unlikely to run on a
modern distribution.

Thus, I don't think there's a point in supporting 586 in a future release.

-- 
A tit a day keeps the vet away.
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Vince Mulhollon]

It'll hit the embedded world pretty hard.

Today you can buy a brand new soekris box that only runs i586.  Brand
new off the shelf, today.  My 6 or 7 year old one is running right now
as an asterisk server at home.  Draws about 5 watts.  Its not exactly
the newest piece of hardware they sell but its still available as an
embedded / embeddable device.  It draws about twice the power of a
rasp-pi, a good solid one amp at 12 volts.

Its kinda sad because two years ago there were threads on the soekris
boards about having to move from Ubuntu to Debian when i586 was
dropped by Ubuntu and now they'll have to move AGAIN just two years
later to ... something.  Its not like I'm going to throw out a working
PBX because of some OS foolishness.  I'll move mine to netbsd or
whatever else runs on a i586.

http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.hardware.soekris.technical/18358

The root cause of the problem is the Debian/Ubuntu ecosystem is moving
away from the "universal OS" mantra and toward being a GNOME
bootloader for tablets and everything else can just go away.  Thats
the war... abandonment of entire industry sectors or weird init
decisions are merely a small battle, the war is the move toward
turning the OS into a GNOME bootloader for tablets.

Note that soekris used to sell embedded low power 486 boards until
semi-recently.  I actually used one as a firewall until I needed more
horsepower for some tasks.  Excellent hardware BTW.
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Steve Litt]

On Fri, 6 May 2016 00:17:31 +0200
Adam Borowski  wrote:

> On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 05:15:56PM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > Debian is dropping suppoort for i586.  It seems to mean tht the
> > i386 platform will no longer run on 586 processors, as gcc starts
> > to generate instructions that are incalid there.  
> [...] 
> > I don't know if we need to watch out for anything relating this in
> > Devuan. Do we plan to support and continue to support i586?  
> 
> Reverting this in a derivative is possible, although it lands you
> pretty much exactly in Raspbian's position.
> 
> You'd need to:
> * reconfigure and rebuild kernel for -585 flavour
> * undo the not-yet-done merging of libc6-i686
> * (no source changes) rebuild every package!
> * watch out for regressions
> 
> The last point can be mostly automated -- you can use the attached
> script to determine the CPU needed to execute a given binary.
> 
> The result will be one-way compatibility: your packages will run on
> any Debian-compatible system but importing from Debian or any other
> external repository will require a rebuild.
> 
> Not worth the effort, I'd say.  Jessie still has four years of
> security support (I don't think Devuan has the manpower to provide
> security support for 40k+ packages alone after Debian ends it), and
> if you'd _still_ run that museal machine at that time, you can
> reconsider.

We need to pick our battles. I bought a Pentium II, a 686, in 1998.
That's a little over 18 years ago. The last 32 bit Pentium, the Pentium
4, stopped selling in August 2008: That's 8 years ago. And since 2004,
you could, and many people did, buy 64 bit machines. A 586 or 32 bit
machine is doubtlessly so old that getting one replacement part would
cost quite enough to just dumpsterize the computer (unless one has a
basement full of cannibalizable computers).

How many peoples' lives would we improve by taking over the i586
version?

SteveT

Steve Litt 
April 2016 featured book: Rapid Learning for the 21st Century
http://www.troubleshooters.com/rl21
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Adam Borowski]

On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 05:15:56PM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> Debian is dropping suppoort for i586.  It seems to mean tht the i386 
> platform will no longer run on 586 processors, as gcc starts to generate 
> instructions that are incalid there.
[...] 
> I don't know if we need to watch out for anything relating this in Devuan.
> Do we plan to support and continue to support i586?

Reverting this in a derivative is possible, although it lands you pretty
much exactly in Raspbian's position.

You'd need to:
* reconfigure and rebuild kernel for -585 flavour
* undo the not-yet-done merging of libc6-i686
* (no source changes) rebuild every package!
* watch out for regressions

The last point can be mostly automated -- you can use the attached script to
determine the CPU needed to execute a given binary.

The result will be one-way compatibility: your packages will run on any
Debian-compatible system but importing from Debian or any other external
repository will require a rebuild.

Not worth the effort, I'd say.  Jessie still has four years of security
support (I don't think Devuan has the manpower to provide security support
for 40k+ packages alone after Debian ends it), and if you'd _still_ run that
museal machine at that time, you can reconsider.

-- 
A tit a day keeps the vet away.
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;

### Identify instruction sets used in a binary file. ###

# Tavis Ormandy  2003
# Improvments by Will Woods 
# Perl convertion by Georgi Georgiev 
# Updated by Ryan Hill 
# Updated by Ward Poelmans  2009

# initialize everything to zero.
my 
($i486,$i586,$ppro,$mmx,$sse,$sse2,$sse3,$sse41,$sse42,$sse4a,$amd,$amd2,$cpuid)
 = (0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0);
my ($vendor, $subarch);

# unfortunately there are mnemonic collisions between vendor sets
# so check vendor_id string, and enable relevant sets.
print "Checking vendor_id string... ";
my $param = $ARGV[0];
unless (defined $ARGV[1] and $ARGV[0] eq "--vendor") {
open FLAGS, "grep -Em1 '^flags' /proc/cpuinfo | " or die "could not 
read cpu flags in $!\n";
#while ( $flags 
my @flags=;
close FLAGS;

open PIPE, "grep -Em1 '^vendor_id.*: ' /proc/cpuinfo | cut -d' ' -f2 | 
" or die "could not read vendor_id";
$_ = ;
close PIPE;

$param = $ARGV[0];
if (/GenuineIntel/) { $vendor="intel";  print 
"GenuineIntel\n" }
elsif (/AuthenticAMD/)  { $vendor="amd"; }
elsif (/CyrixInstead/)  { $vendor="cyrix";  print 
"CyrixInstead\n" }
elsif (/GenuineTMx86/)  { $vendor="transmeta";  print "GenuineTMx86\n" }
else{ $vendor="other";  
print "other\n" }

if ($vendor eq "amd") {
foreach ( @flags ) {
if (/sse2/) { $vendor="amd64"; }
}
}
if ($vendor eq "amd64") { print "AuthenticAMD 64\n"; }
elsif ($vendor eq "amd"){ print "AuthenticAMD\n"; }
}

else {
($vendor) = $ARGV[1];
printf "%s\n", $vendor;
$param = $ARGV[2];
}

# quick sanity tests.
defined $param  or die "usage: $0 [--vendor=intel|amd|amd64|cyrix|transmeta] 
/path/to/binary\n";
-e $param or die "error: $param does not exist.\n";
-r $param or die "error: cant read $param.\n";

printf "Disassembling %s, please wait...\n", $param;

# do the disassembling.
#
# see binutils src include/opcode/* --de.

my (@cpus, %cpus, %inscpu);
sub addins($@)
{
my ($cpu, @instructions) = @_;
push(@cpus, $cpu), $cpus{$cpu}=$#cpus unless $cpus{$cpu};
$inscpu{$_} = $cpus{$cpu} for @instructions;
}

addins "i486",   ("bswap","cmpxchg","invd","invlpg","wbinvd","xadd");
addins "i586",   ("cmpxchg8b","rdmsr","rdtsc","wrmsr");
addins "ppro",   
("cmova","cmovae","cmovb","cmovbe","cmovc","cmove","cmovg","cmovge","cmovl","cmovle","cmovna","cmovnae","cmovnb","cmovnbe","cmovnc","cmovne","cmovng","cmovnge","cmovnl","cmovnle","cmovno","cmovnp","cmovns","cmovnz","cmovo","cmovp","cmovs","cmovz","fcmova","fcmovae","fcmovb","fcmovbe","fcmove","fcmovna","fcmovnae","fcmovnb","fcmovnbe","fcmovne","fcmovnu","fcmovu","fcomi","fcomip","fcompi","fucomi","fucomip","fucompi","fxrstor","fxsave","rdpmc","sysenter","sysexit","ud2","ud2a","ud2b");
addins "mmx",
("emms","movd","movq","packssdw","packsswb","packuswb","paddb","paddd","paddsb","paddsw","paddusb","paddusw","paddw","pand","pandn","pcmpeqb","pcmpeqd","pcmpeqw","pcmpgtb","pcmpgtd","pcmpgtw","pmaddwd","pmulhw","pmullw","por","pslld","psllq","psllw","psrad","psraw","psrld","psrlq","psrlw","psubb","psubd","psubsb","psubsw","psubusb","psubusw","psubw","punpckhbw","punpckhdq","punpckhwd","punpcklbw","punpckldq","punpcklwd","pxor");
addins "sse",

[DNG] Debian is dropping support for i586. Are we?

[Hendrik Boom]

Debian is dropping suppoort for i586.  It seems to mean tht the i386 
platform will no longer run on 586 processors, as gcc starts to generate 
instructions that are incalid there.

Currently this seems to be the case in sid, but it will probably propagate 
through testing.  People with only slightly older machines than my laptop are 
likely to be affected.

When they dropped direct support for i386 years ago, they 
did try to find out if anyone was still using it, and found no one.
But there do seem to be people still using 586.

One has reported it as a bug.  His production server has been disabled by dpkg 
upgrading itself to a new version that won't run.  Naturally without a working 
dpkg it's hard to downgrade again.

I don't know if we need to watch out for anything relating this in Devuan.
Do we plan to support and continue to support i586?

-- hendrik

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng