Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
+ Bastian Blank (Sun, 24 May 2009 21:07:49 +0200): I would like to raise the minimum CPU requirement for the shipped Linux kernels in the i386 port to i686 (with cmov). For now I will not propose a change of the default machine type setting used by the compiler. As Philipp Kern mentioned, you should start by explaining why you want to do that. Maybe it's just to drop one flavour in the i386 builds, or maybe there are maintenance headaches associated with this flavour we're unaware of. That said, and agreeing with what has been said by others in this thread already, they'll have to be ver good reasons in order for such a loss to be acceptable. So, please do not go forward with this unless consensus has been reached. Thanks, -- - Are you sure we're good? - Always. -- Rory and Lorelai -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
On 2009-05-25, Mazen NEIFER mazen.nei...@supaero.org wrote: You're right, most of them don't. This just means that the stat is not representative, but just a lower bound. I personally have an i486, without popcon. In addition, think about poor countries in Africa or Asia, you will probably find a large market of old hardware. So please keep this support. That is, unless you want to leave that up to Ubuntu and make Debian less universal. Kind regards, Philipp Kern -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
On Sun, 24 May 2009, Bastian Blank wrote: This means that Debian will get uninstallable on the following CPUs: - Intel i486, There is new hardware sold today that is (only) compatible to the 486 SX instruction set. But it runs at 300 MHz. So it would be a pity to loose support for such hardware. http://www.dmp.com.tw/tech/Vortex86SX/ http://www.compactpc.com.tw/ebox-2300.htm Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Contribuez à Debian et gagnez un cahier de l'admin Debian Lenny : http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2009/03/02/contribuer-a-debian-gagner-un-livre/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Bastian Blank wa...@debian.org wrote: - VIA C3 before Nehemiah and - National Semiconductor Geode (GXm, GXLV, GX1 and GX2). That affects XO-1 hardware being manufactured now, and C3s are among the viable CPUs for low cost, low dissipation school server style hardware. On the school server, I do my best to keep Debian a valid alternative (though the builds are Fedora based) and with a bit of packaging help most (all?) the XS specific packages could be in Debian. On the XO side, Jonas is packaging sugar and there's a mini-CDD called DebXO that seems to be quite active. I understand supporting additional hw does mean sizable work. Thanks for the fantastic work done so far. Please do consider not dropping support. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
Hi, Bastian Blank schrieb: This means that Debian will get uninstallable on the following CPUs: - Intel i486, - Intel Pentium (MMX), - AMD K5, - AMD K6(-2, -3), Many schools are using LTSP on Debian (Edu) and have this hardware as their thinclients. Would be a shame if all those schools using free software cannot use the next release (and following) because their hardware is no longer supported. And I'm talking of really large numbers here worldwide. Regards, -- .''`. Philipp Hübner debala...@arcor.de : :' : pgp fp: BA61 0B0A 2626 D49C BFC6 1C18 1619 74E4 C259 E0E8 `. `'` HP: http://debalance.funpic.de, Skype: philipp-huebner `- ICQ: 235-524-440, Jabber: der_scha...@jabber.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
On Sun May 24 19:41, Otavio Salvador wrote: On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Bastian Blank wa...@debian.org wrote: Hi folks I would like to raise the minimum CPU requirement for the shipped Linux kernels in the i386 port to i686 (with cmov). For now I will not propose a change of the default machine type setting used by the compiler. Raise it is non-sense. I know of many people that actively use machines that will lose support in this case. I concur, I think you are dropping too many CPUs that are actively used. It wasn't that long ago that we dropped 386 support, and non-686 CPUs have been made (relatively) much more recently (due to things like the Via and other cheap alternatives to Intel/AMD). I'm quite curious to know what is the reason for that? I think we could possible change the default kernel available on full CD set (if we provide an alternative image for usage by those old machines) and I'd also support it not being available for all installer flavours but I do think we can't just drop support for those machines. Can't d-i autodetect CPU features and install a -686 kernel where appropriate? Matt -- Matthew Johnson signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
On Sun, 24 May 2009, Bastian Blank wrote: Hi folks I would like to raise the minimum CPU requirement for the shipped Linux kernels in the i386 port to i686 (with cmov). [..] Popcon gives us some rough numbers to think about: linux-image-2.6-68649518 linux-image-2.6-486 6191 Given that the installer's automatic kernel choice tends to be accurate, we've got quite some non-cmov users. Actually, i386 has got many more non-cmov users than any non-i386/amd64 architecture has _in total_: linux-image-2.6-ixp4xx 772 (=arm/armel) linux-image-2.6-powerpc 551 linux-image-2.6-sparc64 192 linux-image-2.6-orion5x 106 (=arm/armel) (rest 100) #include popcon-accuracy-disclaimer.h So, the good work you're doing to keep supporting arm/powerpc/sparc/etc. will actually benefit much less users than the number you'll be annoying when you drop i386 non-cmov ... Best regards, Anne Bezemer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
J.A. Bezemer cos...@wormhole.robuust.nl writes: On Sun, 24 May 2009, Bastian Blank wrote: Hi folks I would like to raise the minimum CPU requirement for the shipped Linux kernels in the i386 port to i686 (with cmov). [..] Popcon gives us some rough numbers to think about: linux-image-2.6-68649518 linux-image-2.6-486 6191 Given that the installer's automatic kernel choice tends to be accurate, we've got quite some non-cmov users. Actually, i386 has got many more non-cmov users than any non-i386/amd64 architecture has _in total_: linux-image-2.6-ixp4xx 772 (=arm/armel) linux-image-2.6-powerpc 551 linux-image-2.6-sparc64 192 linux-image-2.6-orion5x 106 (=arm/armel) (rest 100) #include popcon-accuracy-disclaimer.h So, the good work you're doing to keep supporting arm/powerpc/sparc/etc. will actually benefit much less users than the number you'll be annoying when you drop i386 non-cmov ... Best regards, Anne Bezemer And how many people with such low power systems do run popcon? How many use a custom kernel? MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
On Mon May 25 15:03, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: And how many people with such low power systems do run popcon? How many use a custom kernel? Oh, I'm sure the numbers aren't very accurate, but I don't think that disproves his point. They're probably not going to be out by a factor of 60... Matt -- Matthew Johnson signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
On Mon May 25 2009 06:03:40 Goswin von Brederlow wrote: And how many people with such low power systems do run popcon? How many use a custom kernel? OTOH, none of the non-cmov i386 systems here run popcon either. --Mike Bird -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
Le lundi 25 mai 2009 à 15:03 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit : J.A. Bezemer cos...@wormhole.robuust.nl writes: On Sun, 24 May 2009, Bastian Blank wrote: Hi folks I would like to raise the minimum CPU requirement for the shipped Linux kernels in the i386 port to i686 (with cmov). [..] Popcon gives us some rough numbers to think about: linux-image-2.6-68649518 linux-image-2.6-486 6191 Given that the installer's automatic kernel choice tends to be accurate, we've got quite some non-cmov users. Actually, i386 has got many more non-cmov users than any non-i386/amd64 architecture has _in total_: linux-image-2.6-ixp4xx 772 (=arm/armel) linux-image-2.6-powerpc 551 linux-image-2.6-sparc64 192 linux-image-2.6-orion5x 106 (=arm/armel) (rest 100) #include popcon-accuracy-disclaimer.h So, the good work you're doing to keep supporting arm/powerpc/sparc/etc. will actually benefit much less users than the number you'll be annoying when you drop i386 non-cmov ... Best regards, Anne Bezemer And how many people with such low power systems do run popcon? How many use a custom kernel? You're right, most of them don't. This just means that the stat is not representative, but just a lower bound. I personally have an i486, without popcon. In addition, think about poor countries in Africa or Asia, you will probably find a large market of old hardware. So please keep this support. Cheers, Mazen, signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
Hi folks I would like to raise the minimum CPU requirement for the shipped Linux kernels in the i386 port to i686 (with cmov). For now I will not propose a change of the default machine type setting used by the compiler. This means that Debian will get uninstallable on the following CPUs: - Intel i486, - Intel Pentium (MMX), - AMD K5, - AMD K6(-2, -3), - Cyrix 6x86, - VIA C3 before Nehemiah and - National Semiconductor Geode (GXm, GXLV, GX1 and GX2). Except for the C3 and the Geodes, all of them were released in the last Millenium and the successors will be available for at least 10 years at the release of Squeeze. Bastian -- Killing is stupid; useless! -- McCoy, A Private Little War, stardate 4211.8 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 09:07:49PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: Hi folks I would like to raise the minimum CPU requirement for the shipped Linux kernels in the i386 port to i686 (with cmov). For now I will not propose a change of the default machine type setting used by the compiler. This means that Debian will get uninstallable on the following CPUs: - Intel i486, - Intel Pentium (MMX), - AMD K5, - AMD K6(-2, -3), - Cyrix 6x86, - VIA C3 before Nehemiah and - National Semiconductor Geode (GXm, GXLV, GX1 and GX2). Except for the C3 and the Geodes, all of them were released in the last Millenium and the successors will be available for at least 10 years at the release of Squeeze. I actively use a VIA C3 (no-cmov) for a number of services, so would prefer not to lose that support. -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
I demand that Bastian Blank may or may not have written... I would like to raise the minimum CPU requirement for the shipped Linux kernels in the i386 port to i686 (with cmov). For now I will not propose a change of the default machine type setting used by the compiler. WRT squeeze, pre- or post-release? (I have access to a 486 and a PMMX, as it happens. Both have lenny installations, but see next to no usage.) [snip] and the successors will be available for at least 10 years at the release of Squeeze. As in machines using (some of) those CPUs will be around for at least 10 years after squeeze is released? Or did you mean will have been available? -- | Darren Salt | linux at youmustbejoking | nr. Ashington, | Doon | Debian GNU/Linux | or ds,demon,co,uk| Northumberland | Army | URL:http://www.youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk/progs.packages.html I've used Basic so long, my brain has gonesub permanently -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
On 2009-05-24, Bastian Blank wa...@debian.org wrote: I would like to raise the minimum CPU requirement for the shipped Linux kernels in the i386 port to i686 (with cmov). For now I will not propose a change of the default machine type setting used by the compiler. IMHO you got to explain why you want to make that chance. Is it only to reduce the number of flavours? Why should we break the kernel on hardware like Geodes? Kind regards, Philipp kern -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Raising minimum CPU requirement for i386 kernel
Hello Bastian, On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Bastian Blank wa...@debian.org wrote: Hi folks I would like to raise the minimum CPU requirement for the shipped Linux kernels in the i386 port to i686 (with cmov). For now I will not propose a change of the default machine type setting used by the compiler. Raise it is non-sense. I know of many people that actively use machines that will lose support in this case. I'm quite curious to know what is the reason for that? I think we could possible change the default kernel available on full CD set (if we provide an alternative image for usage by those old machines) and I'd also support it not being available for all installer flavours but I do think we can't just drop support for those machines. Cheers, -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
