From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51C4F138334 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:13:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C95E9E0942; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:13:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pl1-f196.google.com (mail-pl1-f196.google.com [209.85.214.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7165DE0935 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:13:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pl1-f196.google.com with SMTP id p4-v6so1158103pll.8 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 07:13:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=LK/AClxXsSfkSQ/UWb+OcjQCGYGWKD8K08GpO4lk6XE=; b=oVKFH0JvTyKXML7fMhLI23orI1vziHilZ8CyBJDvljR3GSGvIXp6TEd/URZ/I9qzW8 fMOkR5meemEC/3wH6cY2dRJUAFB0bAgbDtoJOSeTkEXgfGG+18HUj1wX1JIK310cycQN rxz8yWFOZKBE+mqHQqNzVTzm7aAfclDrx7EpeWonjtuDhKCGHVzj2QhpxZo3En0ppTvN sYPBBlaWpRDB4AZ1Ul1+pcheLUwiwqqekEgUnWtY6J3yBxDjmDTNwKB8UbgqXrBcmvVR 0obGmja54crqK3qS6AzXz7ZqsOY3zvSUQnsC2YpsdznpElQfRu3oIoqLAGBCkQZzrYdo HzZw== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51B6QRP5vWodIZA5yr4lreNckE3GG85ewkhrtT1Zxqujfl7wkaUS KmrNiShZiVHc8EV8ePUJcJ4UVOOAMhjAjLgmxFU1sJAH X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdaH0SVzPWt3RXEzXSjUgaCd3WdJt9WpFzc9l/8EvL1SaR59MBfytkGcKK9gkltE7Ma/n+Yx/GAsDaEEhlQSnDE= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:76c5:: with SMTP id j5-v6mr1855645plt.123.1535120033781; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 07:13:53 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5cc35530-3d96-1a0f-b484-73ea3d58bed5@gentoo.org> <20180825011945.254bb9ca@katipo2.lan> In-Reply-To: From: Rich Freeman Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:13:42 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: bd2cf014-b211-40e7-9c9d-231eebb66fa5 X-Archives-Hash: e40e4c44404bde6e22cf862132d91352 On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:57 AM Mike Gilbert wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:19 AM Kent Fredric wrote: > > > > On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 07:26:24 -0500 > > Ben Kohler wrote: > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Is there a good reason we can't have a legacy profile for this? > > > > Or perhaps, a new (exp) arch entirely dedicated to legacy x86? > > Sounds like a lot of work for something that will be used by very few people. > I think an exp arch is also overkill. How many packages simply can't be built for i486? I think a profile+masking makes a lot more sense than an entire new level of QA that touches every ebuild in the tree because there might be a few packages that don't work on 25 year old hardware. -- Rich