4 ms·

I wasn't discounting VMs with my initial statement. I can totally imagine quite a few VMs still being around, either migrated from physical hardware or even set

by pilif 1y ago

I wasn't discounting VMs with my initial statement. I can totally imagine quite a few VMs still being around, either migrated from physical hardware or even set up fresh to conserve resources. Plus, keeping i386 the same also means any still available support for running 32 bit binaries on 64 bit machines. All of these cases (especially the installable 32 bit support) must be as big or bigger than the amount of ARM machines out there.

bobmcnamara 1y ago
Opt in numbers here: https://popcon.debian.org/ https://popcon.debian.org/
- pilif 1y ago
  that tells me my snark about i386 being the most commonly used 32 bit architecture wasn't too far off reality, doesn't it?
  - bobmcnamara 1y ago
    Indeed - i386 is certainly the most common 32-bit Debian platform. Note also that the numbers are log-scale, so while it looks like Arm64 is a close third over all bitwidths, it isn't.
    - School-Cotton 1y ago
      I'm actually amazed by this, I would have bet a lot on aarch64 being second.
      - bobmcnamara 1y ago
        Debian doesn't support Arm64 Mac...
        School-Cotton 1y ago
        You can run whatever distro you want in a VM, though. My daily driver is GuixSD in an aarch64 VM on a Mac. I wouldn’t recommend guixsd if you don’t love tinkering and troubleshooting, but otherwise the setup works fine.
axus 1y ago
In the Linux binary context, do i386 and i686 mean the same thing? i686 seems relatively modern in comparison, even if it's 32-bit.
- mananaysiempre 1y ago
  Few places still maintain genuine i386 support—I don’t believe the Linux kernel does, for example. There some important features it lacks, such as CMPXCHG. Nowadays Debian’s i386 is actually i686 (Pentium Pro), but apparently they’ve decided to introduce a new “i686” architecture label to denote a 32-bit x86 ABI with a 64-bit time_t. Also, I’m sorry to have to tell you that the 80386 came out in 1985 (with the Compaq Deskpro 386 releasing in 1986) and the Pentium Pro in 1995. That is, i686 is three times closer to i386 than it is to now.

by pilif 1y ago

bobmcnamara 1y ago

Opt in numbers here: https://popcon.debian.org/ https://popcon.debian.org/

pilif 1y ago
that tells me my snark about i386 being the most commonly used 32 bit architecture wasn't too far off reality, doesn't it?
- bobmcnamara 1y ago
  Indeed - i386 is certainly the most common 32-bit Debian platform. Note also that the numbers are log-scale, so while it looks like Arm64 is a close third over all bitwidths, it isn't.
  - School-Cotton 1y ago
    I'm actually amazed by this, I would have bet a lot on aarch64 being second.
    - bobmcnamara 1y ago
      Debian doesn't support Arm64 Mac...
      - School-Cotton 1y ago
        You can run whatever distro you want in a VM, though. My daily driver is GuixSD in an aarch64 VM on a Mac. I wouldn’t recommend guixsd if you don’t love tinkering and troubleshooting, but otherwise the setup works fine.

axus 1y ago

In the Linux binary context, do i386 and i686 mean the same thing? i686 seems relatively modern in comparison, even if it's 32-bit.

mananaysiempre 1y ago
Few places still maintain genuine i386 support—I don’t believe the Linux kernel does, for example. There some important features it lacks, such as CMPXCHG. Nowadays Debian’s i386 is actually i686 (Pentium Pro), but apparently they’ve decided to introduce a new “i686” architecture label to denote a 32-bit x86 ABI with a 64-bit time_t. Also, I’m sorry to have to tell you that the 80386 came out in 1985 (with the Compaq Deskpro 386 releasing in 1986) and the Pentium Pro in 1995. That is, i686 is three times closer to i386 than it is to now.