4 ms·

Who is still using these machines? Genuine question, not trolling. It looks like the last machines of each architecture were released: Alpha in 2007 HP-PA i

Who is still using these machines? Genuine question, not trolling. It looks like the last machines of each architecture were released: Alpha in 2007 HP-PA in 2008 m68k in pre-2000 though derivatives are used in embedded systems sh4 in 1998 (though possible usage via "J2 core" using expired patents) This means that most are nearly 20 years old or older. Rust target triples exist for: m68k: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/rustc/platform-support/m68k-unknown-linux-gnu.html https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/rustc/platform-support/m68... and https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/rustc/platform-support/m68k-unknown-none-elf.html https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/rustc/platform-support/m68... both at Tier 3. (Did not find target triples for the others.) If you are using these machines, what are you using them for? (Again, genuinely curious)

3eb7988a1663 11mo ago
Debian just cut i386, Wikipedia says the i386 was discontinued in 2007. These systems are all of the same vintage, so it does not seem a huge leap to be culled from the support list. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I386 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I386
- stackskipton 11mo ago
  i386 (32 bit) only processors we discontinued but 64bit processors can operate in 32bit mode so toolchain was still widely available and there was still demand for i386 OS that would run on modern hardware in i386 mode for some ancient software.
- loeg 11mo ago
  Yeah, and you can still run i386 binaries on widely available amd64 CPUs. So this is an even stronger argument for killing these other obsolete platforms.
  - LtWorf 11mo ago
    You can only run the binaries if you have the libc to run them.
    - loeg 11mo ago
      You say that like it is a higher or even comparable barrier to having alpha/m68k/sh4 hardware; it isn't.
      - LtWorf 11mo ago
        Uh? I don't understand what you're saying.
- einr 11mo ago
  The actual Intel 80386 processor was discontinued in 2007, but the i386 architecture -- ia32, 32-bit x86 -- lived on for longer in the semi-mainstream (there were 32-bit Intel Atoms introduced to the market as late as 2012, AMD Geodes were sold until at least 2019, and I believe some VIA C3/C7 derivatives made it into the 2010s as well) and is in fact still in production to this day for the embedded and industrial markets (Vortex86, etc).
  - Dagonfly 11mo ago
    All of those are i586 or i686 though right? AMD Geode LX is the only i586 CPU produced in the last 15 years. Everything else is at least i686 and Rust has perfectly adequate i686 support. Is there any major distro left with pre i686 support?
    - aragilar 11mo ago
      Debian's i386 is actually i686 I believe.
kortilla 11mo ago
Think about any time a computer is used in something designed to last 30+ years. Cars, airplanes, construction equipment, etc.
- pezezin 11mo ago
  I am pretty sure that those machines are not running Debian.
  - stouset 11mo ago
    And almost certainly not whatever the next stable release of Debian is.
  - goodpoint 11mo ago
    You'd be surprised.
    - estebank 11mo ago
      Even if they are, they are not updating to latest Debian stable.
      - julian-klode 11mo ago
        I mean they can't in the first place, because ports only have unstable available
      - kortilla 11mo ago
        They try if they are internet connected
  - tacker2000 11mo ago
    Why not? How do you know that? Debian is used pretty widely
    - dathinab 11mo ago
wk_end 11mo ago
There’s hobbyists using m68k Macs, Amigas, and Atari STs. Definitely a small niche, and those running Linux on those machines more so.
- estimator7292 11mo ago
  Sure, but almost nobody uses or wants modern linuxes on those machines. It's almost always described (in their own words) as "some ancient crusty version of Debian"
  - cbmuser 11mo ago
    Nobody wants to play games on Linux given the small userbase compared to Windows. Yet people work on it. You could make this argument for so many usecases but apparently people just enjoy bashing retrocomputing here.
    - pezezin 11mo ago
      > Nobody wants to play games on Linux given the small userbase compared to Windows. According to the last Steam survey, 3% of players use Linux. Steam has 130 million active players, so that means there are 4 million people playing on Linux. Definitely not "nobody", and way bigger than the whole retrocomputing community. By the way, I am also one of those retrocomputing guys, I have a Pentium 2 running Windows 98 right here. IMHO, trying to shoehorn modern software on old hardware is ridiculous, the whole point of retro hardware is using retro software.
cbmuser 11mo ago
> Who is still using these machines? Genuine question, not trolling. Well, there are so many things were you could argue about the relevance of a userbase. If the size of a userbase would be the only argument, Valve could just drop support for the Linux userbase which is just 2-3% of their overall userbase.
- 3eb7988a1663 11mo ago
  Not your point, but Linux compatibility is Valve protecting themselves from the existential risk that is a capricious Microsoft. At one point, it seemed Microsoft was trying to make the Microsoft Store be the mechanism for distributing all software. Linux being viable for gaming is/was their safety net to avoid being locked out from the ecosystem.
- remexre 11mo ago
  Are there even close to 2% of Debian users using a DEC Alpha?
  - throwaway7356 11mo ago
    popcon.debian.org reports 3 alpha installations and 261750 amd64 installations. Assuming comparable opt-in rates there are less than 0.002% of the users using alpha. The other mentioned architectures hppa, m68k and sh4 are at a similar level.
- bastawhiz 11mo ago
  Valve isn't a good example. They have strong Linux support so they can sell Steamdecks without licensing with Microsoft. Without their work on Proton, Steam effectively lives or dies by the will of Microsoft.
Too 11mo ago
It’s usually a loud minority of trolls or hobbyists. It just takes one to spark a doubt. Here is one famous example of a dude who’s managed to get PRs merged in dozens of packages, just to make them compatible with ancient versions of nodejs https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44831811 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44831811
- combyn8tor 11mo ago
  Wow that was an interesting read. I find it amusing that nobody seems to really know who he is or what his motives are, yet his code is run on millions of machines every day.
PunchyHamster 11mo ago
people enjoy running vintage stuff, and running modern stuff on some vintage thing is kinda cool. But yeah, those can figure out how to keep their own port
kouteiheika 11mo ago
> Who is still using these machines? Genuine question, not trolling. Either legacy systems (which are most certainly not running the current bleeding-edge Debian) or retro computing enthusiast. These platforms are long obsolete and there are no practical reasons to run them besides "I have a box in the corner that's running untouched for the last 20 years" and "for fun". I can get a more powerful and power efficient computer (than any of these systems) from my local e-waste recycling facility for free.

3eb7988a1663 11mo ago

Debian just cut i386, Wikipedia says the i386 was discontinued in 2007. These systems are all of the same vintage, so it does not seem a huge leap to be culled from the support list. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I386 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I386

stackskipton 11mo ago
i386 (32 bit) only processors we discontinued but 64bit processors can operate in 32bit mode so toolchain was still widely available and there was still demand for i386 OS that would run on modern hardware in i386 mode for some ancient software.
loeg 11mo ago
Yeah, and you can still run i386 binaries on widely available amd64 CPUs. So this is an even stronger argument for killing these other obsolete platforms.
- LtWorf 11mo ago
  You can only run the binaries if you have the libc to run them.
  - loeg 11mo ago
    You say that like it is a higher or even comparable barrier to having alpha/m68k/sh4 hardware; it isn't.
    - LtWorf 11mo ago
      Uh? I don't understand what you're saying.
einr 11mo ago
The actual Intel 80386 processor was discontinued in 2007, but the i386 architecture -- ia32, 32-bit x86 -- lived on for longer in the semi-mainstream (there were 32-bit Intel Atoms introduced to the market as late as 2012, AMD Geodes were sold until at least 2019, and I believe some VIA C3/C7 derivatives made it into the 2010s as well) and is in fact still in production to this day for the embedded and industrial markets (Vortex86, etc).
- Dagonfly 11mo ago
  All of those are i586 or i686 though right? AMD Geode LX is the only i586 CPU produced in the last 15 years. Everything else is at least i686 and Rust has perfectly adequate i686 support. Is there any major distro left with pre i686 support?
  - aragilar 11mo ago
    Debian's i386 is actually i686 I believe.

kortilla 11mo ago

Think about any time a computer is used in something designed to last 30+ years. Cars, airplanes, construction equipment, etc.

pezezin 11mo ago
I am pretty sure that those machines are not running Debian.
- stouset 11mo ago
  And almost certainly not whatever the next stable release of Debian is.
- goodpoint 11mo ago
  You'd be surprised.
  - estebank 11mo ago
    Even if they are, they are not updating to latest Debian stable.
    - julian-klode 11mo ago
      I mean they can't in the first place, because ports only have unstable available
    - kortilla 11mo ago
      They try if they are internet connected
- tacker2000 11mo ago
  Why not? How do you know that? Debian is used pretty widely
  - dathinab 11mo ago

wk_end 11mo ago

There’s hobbyists using m68k Macs, Amigas, and Atari STs. Definitely a small niche, and those running Linux on those machines more so.

estimator7292 11mo ago
Sure, but almost nobody uses or wants modern linuxes on those machines. It's almost always described (in their own words) as "some ancient crusty version of Debian"
- cbmuser 11mo ago
  Nobody wants to play games on Linux given the small userbase compared to Windows. Yet people work on it. You could make this argument for so many usecases but apparently people just enjoy bashing retrocomputing here.
  - pezezin 11mo ago
    > Nobody wants to play games on Linux given the small userbase compared to Windows. According to the last Steam survey, 3% of players use Linux. Steam has 130 million active players, so that means there are 4 million people playing on Linux. Definitely not "nobody", and way bigger than the whole retrocomputing community. By the way, I am also one of those retrocomputing guys, I have a Pentium 2 running Windows 98 right here. IMHO, trying to shoehorn modern software on old hardware is ridiculous, the whole point of retro hardware is using retro software.

cbmuser 11mo ago

> Who is still using these machines? Genuine question, not trolling. Well, there are so many things were you could argue about the relevance of a userbase. If the size of a userbase would be the only argument, Valve could just drop support for the Linux userbase which is just 2-3% of their overall userbase.

3eb7988a1663 11mo ago
Not your point, but Linux compatibility is Valve protecting themselves from the existential risk that is a capricious Microsoft. At one point, it seemed Microsoft was trying to make the Microsoft Store be the mechanism for distributing all software. Linux being viable for gaming is/was their safety net to avoid being locked out from the ecosystem.
remexre 11mo ago
Are there even close to 2% of Debian users using a DEC Alpha?
- throwaway7356 11mo ago
  popcon.debian.org reports 3 alpha installations and 261750 amd64 installations. Assuming comparable opt-in rates there are less than 0.002% of the users using alpha. The other mentioned architectures hppa, m68k and sh4 are at a similar level.
bastawhiz 11mo ago
Valve isn't a good example. They have strong Linux support so they can sell Steamdecks without licensing with Microsoft. Without their work on Proton, Steam effectively lives or dies by the will of Microsoft.

Too 11mo ago

It’s usually a loud minority of trolls or hobbyists. It just takes one to spark a doubt. Here is one famous example of a dude who’s managed to get PRs merged in dozens of packages, just to make them compatible with ancient versions of nodejs https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44831811 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44831811

combyn8tor 11mo ago
Wow that was an interesting read. I find it amusing that nobody seems to really know who he is or what his motives are, yet his code is run on millions of machines every day.

PunchyHamster 11mo ago

people enjoy running vintage stuff, and running modern stuff on some vintage thing is kinda cool. But yeah, those can figure out how to keep their own port

kouteiheika 11mo ago

> Who is still using these machines? Genuine question, not trolling. Either legacy systems (which are most certainly not running the current bleeding-edge Debian) or retro computing enthusiast. These platforms are long obsolete and there are no practical reasons to run them besides "I have a box in the corner that's running untouched for the last 20 years" and "for fun". I can get a more powerful and power efficient computer (than any of these systems) from my local e-waste recycling facility for free.