-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)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=5M/M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 01.02.2016 23:14, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Ubuntu has an i386 port which is fully supported.
>
> There a bunch of 3rd party applications that rely on the Multi-Arch
> technology to support/use i386 binaries on amd64 (e.g. Skype from the
> partner archive). BTW, can we ask Microsoft to publish native amd64
> binaries, rather than those that rely on multi-arch i386? Also, does
> Valve Steam product rely on i386 multiarch binaries? or is it fully
> amd64? (and e.g. downloads/bundles/ships any required i386 binaries
> that it needs)? And Netflix - does that run on amd64-only without i386
> multiarch?
>
> However, it seems to me that this is done specifically on otherwise
> full amd64 installations.
>
> My guess is that: all currently shipped hardware, with enough support
> to run full Unity (7) Desktop, is amd64. Tested with amd64 kernel, and
> amd64 graphics drivers. And hardware validation is done on amd64 too.
>
> In 2016, people with i386-only hardware are unlikely to be capable to
> run Unity 7 Desktop, and probably run other Ubuntu variants. I guess
> there are some accidental i386 users, e.g. those that have installed
> i386 variant on amd64 hardware.
Just wondering whether you considered netbooks here. Not that old (maybe 6y?)
and at least the two specimens I would have around are early Atoms (i386 only)
but with (also early) i915 Intel graphics. They used to be reasonably
accelerated to cope. Not sure about unity 7. But maybe some reason to allow at
least for 16.04 some i386 iso (by 18.04 the problem might be resolved through
the crappy life-span recent hw seems to have)...
-Stefan
>
> Does it still make sense to build ubuntu-desktop-i386.iso? Validate
> it? Test it on amd64 hardware? Ship it?
>
> To me this seems like a futile effort. Imho, we should only test the
> relevant multiarch i386 pieces that are there to support 3rd-party,
> i386-only apps on amd64 desktop.
>
> This is specifically about building, validating and shipping
> ubuntu-desktop-i386.iso, specifically for the Ubuntu Desktop flavour.
> Which I am suggesting should be dropped. Without any other changes to
> the archive and/or publishing i386 binaries.
>
