-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Drop i386 support #321
Comments
@mika assigning you for a decision |
Yeah good point, thanks for raising this. Neither any of my customers nor myself use any actual i386 system any longer. I don't think that we strictly need i386 support for our vision (like #311), like for VM images or alike? |
+1 for dropping i386 support. Rationals: https://blog.grml.org/archives/416-grml32-sunset.html + https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/-/commit/a18e683900b4f5ffb30dd18b8481cbdc66e7a34a |
Decision from meeting: drop it all. |
Debian stops supporting the "i386" port with trixie, and we have not been testing it for a very long time. Also simplifies some code here. Closes: #321
Debian stops supporting the "i386" port with trixie, and we have not been testing it for a very long time. Also simplifies some code here. Closes: #321
It won't be possible to install a bootable trixie i386. At least for that combo (+ testing + unstable) we should fail early.
Big q: should we drop all code paths for i386?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: