Richard Braun: I will notify the upstream devs that I'm willing to port. Santiago Vila: Yes, 32bit ain't dead yet, but being real about it, I don't really know anybody that has a 32bit machine and uses it on a day-to-day basis. Most have thrown them out, except for businesses who don't have money and are still running Windows XP, much less what we're talking about. Even so, it scares me a bit that they've even bothered targeting machines specifically to drop support for. Unless 32bit is still manufactured, it will be dropped even further down the road. I understand the reason right now is "too old," but it's 2016, most folks who have a laptop (at least in the US) have 64bit machines, all the modern tech I'm seeing is exactly so. I know, I know, it's controversial and that's just my opinion, leaving developing/third world markets out of it. But I'm also not ready to see the HURD fall behind. Now, I'm moving on and will refuse to argue further. Mr. Braun: I will contact the folks upstream @ the GNU project when I'm ready to start working. Haven't quite reached that point yet. :-)
Cheers!MGage On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 1:39 PM -0700, "Santiago Vila" <sanv...@unex.es> wrote: On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 10:48:01PM +0000, Gage Morgan wrote: > Another thing: Apparently Debian is having issues with compiling > things to 32bit architectures due to removal of features in GCC, That's not accurate. Support for very old CPUs have been removed, that's all. So, there may be reasons to get hurd-amd64 up and running, but lack of 32-bit support is not one of them.
