On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 08:14:43PM -0500, John Morris wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 16:25 -0500, Don Wright wrote:
> > Dragan FOSS wrote:
> > >I think it's best to drop 32-bit support at all... it's such a waste of
> > >time and resources.
> >
> >
> > As long as you're pruning, kill x64 as well, because the majority of
> > computers sold are using ARM architecture and run Android or iOS.
>
> I think you are joking, but it helps not to confuse the three big forks
>
> 1. Linux / GNU / X, this is the fork Devuan is on and few Devuan
> installs are on ARM. At this late date, there probably aren't many on
> x86_32 either. Which is why discussion of eliminating a big chunk or
> archive space and compile time will continue to recur until eventually
> nobody can muster a good argument for continuing.

I'm still on a 32-bit Intel machine, and given an OS with the
fficiency of Devuan, it's perfectly capable of doing what I need.
Does this count as an x86_32? If so, I'd be happy with Devuan keeping
it for a long time yet. If not, I'd like to know what it *does* count
as.

hendrik@notlookedfor:~$ uname -a
Linux notlookedfor 3.16.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.16.43-2
(2017-04-30) i686 GNU/Linux
hendrik@notlookedfor:~$

I'm *thinking* of upgrading, butt until I can get a better laptop that
doesn't have significant vulnerabilities baked into the *hardware*,
I'd rather keep using what I've got.

-- hendrik