On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 04:07:23PM -0400, Bryan Quigley wrote: > Hello, > > Less and less non-amd64-compatible i386 hardware is available for consumers > to buy today from anything but computer part recycling centers. The last of > these machines were manufactured over a decade ago, and support from > an increasing > number of upstream projects has ended. > > Ubuntu and flavors just completed the 18.04 release cycle. This released > version will either be supported until 2021 or 2023, depending on the > product, team, and willingness to support it. At that point in time, the > majority of these machines are approaching two decades old. > > >>Previous 2016 thread: And in 2018, the question will come if we can > effectively provide security support on i386. > We can't. Machines running i386 Ubuntu which are capable of running amd64 > Ubuntu are vulnerable to the critical Meltdown vulnerability where they > wouldn't be if they were running amd64. (Some actual i386 hardware simply > isn't vulnerable, but some is). > > We still have a relatively high number if i386 downloads but that doesn't > mean users machines are not capable of amd64. For the flavors remaining > today on i386 here are some i386 to amd64 ratios for 18.04: > > Lubuntu cdimage - 0.87 > Lubuntu tracker - 0.64 > Lubuntu error (pcmanfm) - 0.11 > Xubuntu cdimage - 0.49 > Xubuntu tracker - 0.30 > Xubuntu error (thunar) - 0.10 > Kylin tracker - 0.30 > Kylin error (engrampa) - 0.10 > Kubuntu cdimage - 0.14 > Kubuntu tracker - 0.12 > Kubuntu error (kinit) - 0.07 > > The data retrieved from cdimage is for a limited time period on May 7th. All > cdimage statistics included many hundreds to thousands of downloads (except > Ubuntu Kylin due to it using it's own CDN, so not being included here). The > torrent tracker results are available here: http://torrent.ubuntu.com:6969/ > . > The error tracker statistics come from comparing top bugs shared between > i386 and amd64 over last week. Bugs that affect multiple flavors are not > included. > It's not fully understood why there is a large discrepancy between the > error tracker and other sources - but it's possible apport doesn't work as > well in low memory.
Could you elaborate on the methodology you used to create these Error Tracker statistics? I'm not certain engrampa was a representative choice given that it is also part of the xubuntu-desktop and ubuntu-mate-desktop tasks. -- Brian Murray -- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
