32-bit ARM Is Also On The Chopping Block For Ubuntu

[Sniperfox47]

This is about 32 bit ARM support such as the original Raspberry Pi & Beagle Boards

Just want to point out that unless something has changed drastically in the past few months, even the Raspberry Pi 3 runs with a 32 bit kernel (on 64 bit hardware), since the GPU firmware requires a 32 bit kernel.

There are a few distros that use driver interface hacks on top of a 64 bit kernel (I believe Fedora does this) to get it to work but it's hacky and causes some driver bugs.

[jacob]

Ubuntu should drop support for everything but Windows 10 on x86_64 machines. Supporting only the most popular hardware configurations is what made Linux great.

Er. Actually the ARM architecture is where Linux rules supreme. With my excuses to Apple fanboys, it's fair to say that without Linux support, ARM wouldn't nearly be what it is. Yes, Linux was initially conceived as a desktop PC operating system and unfortunately that's the last area that it still has to crack. Bur for pretty much everything else it has long become the go-to OS and dropping it would be the stupidest idea ever.

[leiptrstormr]

Ubuntu should drop support for everything but Windows 10 on x86_64 machines. Supporting only the most popular hardware configurations is what made Linux great.

[stormcrow]

According to popcon, there are 2071481 i386 installations as compared to 685534 amd64 installations (https://popcon.ubuntu.com/).
Thus, abandoning the i386 port would be a pretty dumb decision.

There are far more 32 bit x86 computers out there, making that probably the worst decision here. One of the major uses for the 32 bit release also is not for 32 bit x86 hardware, but to use inside a VM on a 64 Bit x86 CPU that does not support VT hardware assisted virtualization.

And other arguments about ia32 ... totally irrelevant to the article people. Did you read the article before posting? This is about 32 bit ARM support such as the original Raspberry Pi & Beagle Boards, NOT about ia32 (legacy x86) support.

I'm really not sure how many ARMHF Ubuntu users are out there, but if the metrics for the popularity contests (225 submissions?) are correct, and they don't have enough people to support that port, then by all means, drop support. I'd say the same about any other low hanging fruit. I'm also saying this as a Raspberry PI B+ user, though in my case I use Raspbian. Competition is a good thing, but when you just don't have the users or resources to justify the effort, move on.

[starshipeleven]

Well I'm pretty sure a Ubuntu user would find it very challenging to even flash gpio leds with a SBC slower than a 64bit quad-core. They'd need to be able to run WebKit and communicate with node etc.

That's why Raspbian is based on Debian, and not Ubuntu, among other things.

[caligula]

Well I'm pretty sure a Ubuntu user would find it very challenging to even flash gpio leds with a SBC slower than a 64bit quad-core. They'd need to be able to run WebKit and communicate with node etc.

[lucrus]

I'm happy they drop 32bit. Ubuntu was never meant for slow computers, there's a plethora of other distros for that.

[Vistaus]

According to popcon, there are 2071481 i386 installations as compared to 685534 amd64 installations (https://popcon.ubuntu.com/).

Thus, abandoning the i386 port would be a pretty dumb decision.

Also, I don't see any valid point in such a decision. 95% of the porting work for Ubuntu is done in Debian. Canonical just needs to maintain their buildds and fix a package here and there.

Thus, the small amount of effort saved does - in no way - justify the large loss of users and backward compatibility with 32-bit applications like WINE.

This whole "Let's abandon 32-bit ports" is pure activism by folk who apparently have too much free time.

Uninformed user is uninformed.

First of all: 32-bit applications and libraries will continue to be supported on the 64-bit version.
Second of all: this topic is about dropping 32-bit ARM support. I'm pretty sure that's a different architecture than i386, but even if they count it as i386: how many of your 2071481 installations are 32-bit ARM?

[starshipeleven]

There are far more 32 bit x86 computers out there, making that probably the worst decision here.

Source? Because I'm not seeing this in my IT job. 32-bit stuff is a minority and is on its way out everywhere.

Removing the 32 bit release will make it impossible to run Ubuntu has a guest on a large number of 64 Bit Intel CPUs!

And such CPUs are? Because last I checked we are talking of first/second gen of Core2Duo where not all CPUs supported that, later CPUs all have VT-x.

I'm leaving most Atoms out of the discussion because they either run like shit even with a single OS or they are mounted in devices that are not meant to be using VMs like tablets so they lack storage, running VMs on them is retarded.

[andre30correia]

There are far more 32 bit x86 computers out there, making that probably the worst decision here. One of the major uses for the 32 bit release also is not for 32 bit x86 hardware, but to use inside a VM on a 64 Bit x86 CPU that does not support VT hardware assisted virtualization.You cannot run a 64 bit guest without VT technology on the CPU. But many Intel CPUs did not support VT leaving no way to run a 64 bit guest. This meant on many computers, you can only run a 32 bit guest, even though host system is 64 bits. Removing the 32 bit release will make it impossible to run Ubuntu has a guest on a large number of 64 Bit Intel CPUs!

running a vm without VT-x is a nightmare, for some reason such cpu are not build anymore. I really doubt you can ever use ubuntu default desktop with such cpu