Drop support for Debian's "i386" port #324
Conversation
|
Lets see what CI says, as I have a bit of a hard time testing it locally. |
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
| @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ Bootstrap options: | |||
| --nodebootstrap Skip debootstrap, only do configuration to the target. | |||
| --grub <device> Target for grub installation. Usage example: /dev/sda | |||
| --efi <device> Target for EFI installation. Usage example: /dev/sda1 | |||
| --arch <arch> Set target architecture, use for installing i386 on amd64. | |||
| --arch <arch> Set target architecture. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this useful at all anymore now that we're dropping i386 support? As in, can we deploy arm64 on amd64 or vice-versa? 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
arm64 can indeed be deployed on amd64 if you have the right qemu-user binaries installed (I think qemu-user-static is the right package for that). I've done so multiple times when testing #299. I wouldn't be surprised if amd64 could be deployed from arm64, though I haven't tested that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't want to drop it now, but I imagine it doesnt work very well at the moment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For me it works transparently - building an arm64 image on my Intel-based system is exactly as easy as building an amd64 image, the only differences are you have to have the right qemu package installed, and of course it's quite a bit slower to build. Otherwise, it just works.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh very nice, then let's not restrict this further but keep it as is. Thanks for info, @ArrayBolt3 👍
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