No 32bit Carbon release?

johnraff · 2024-09-13 07:28:08

It looks pretty certain that 32bit builds of BunsenLabs Carbon will be impossible:

This is a heads-up that the kernel team is planning to stop building
i386 kernel packages shortly (probably starting with Linux 6.11).

https://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/ … 00138.html

I suppose we might be able to freeze the i386 kernel at 6.10, but that presupposes that debian-installer and live-build would continue to work. It doesn't look easy.

hhh · 2024-09-13 14:00:07

We'll have to wait and see. The current Release Notes list 32 bit as being supported...

https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/ … ew.en.html

Maybe Debian will freeze a kernel for the 32 bit version. Otherwise, I agree that we should drop our 32 bit ISO to better focus on the transition to Wayland.

DeepDayze · 2024-09-13 15:22:24

hhh wrote:

We'll have to wait and see. The current Release Notes list 32 bit as being supported...
https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/ … ew.en.html
So end of an era for Debian and I'd bet AntiX and other 32 bit Debian derivates might have to make a choice going forward as well.
Maybe Debian will freeze a kernel for the 32 bit version. Otherwise, I agree that we should drop our 32 bit ISO to better focus on the transition to Wayland.

Perhaps then at least for Trixie there would be a 6.10 LTS kernel for the 32 bit image that may well be the final 32 bit Debian installer image? Hope Debian at least produces that so if anyone wants a 32 bit kernel beyond that they would have to compile their own no doubt.

Last edited by DeepDayze (2024-09-13 15:24:06)

or1o9 · 2024-09-13 16:21:00

hhh wrote:

Otherwise, I agree that we should drop our 32 bit ISO to better focus on the transition to Wayland.

This.

hhh · 2024-09-13 16:36:51

DeepDayze wrote:

Perhaps then at least for Trixie there would be a 6.10 LTS kernel for the 32 bit image that may well be the final 32 bit Debian installer image?

This is what I was thinking. But trixie's release is almost a year away, hence my "wait and see" remark. We should know in a few months when trixie freezes start happening (usually the first soft freeze happens about 7 months before the release), but no dates for the freeze cycle have been announced yet, as far as I know...

https://release.debian.org/testing/freeze_policy.html

If Debian drops 32-bit for trixie, users with 32-bit systems should stick with boron/bullseye, who's end-of-life wont happen until about June of 2026...

https://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases# … n_Releases

Last edited by hhh (2024-09-13 16:48:27)

hhh · 2024-09-13 16:59:59

or1o9 wrote:

hhh wrote:
Otherwise, I agree that we should drop our 32 bit ISO to better focus on the transition to Wayland.
This.

I'm loving Wayland because of the increased graphics performance on my (cheap) hardware, but it's a whole different animal, and still needs some taming to get a comparable BL experience out of it to what we currently have with Xorg. labwc does not exactly replicate Openbox. But that's off topic...

https://forums.bunsenlabs.org/viewtopic.php?id=8843

DeepDayze · 2024-09-13 17:07:26

hhh wrote:

or1o9 wrote:
hhh wrote:
Otherwise, I agree that we should drop our 32 bit ISO to better focus on the transition to Wayland.
This.
I'm loving Wayland because of the increased graphics performance on my (cheap) hardware, but it's a whole different animal, and still needs some taming to get a comparable BL experience out of it to what we currently have with Xorg. labwc does not exactly replicate Openbox. But that's off topic...
https://forums.bunsenlabs.org/viewtopic.php?id=8843

I took KDE 6.1.4 for a spin (using Arch) and it and Wayland does seem very performant on an old 2nd gen i7 HP laptop. Plan to try out labwc as well using Debian soon, as with the very early alpha work done by you, @johnraff and @micko1 it sure does look promising for a Wayland-enabled BL that comes as close to how it's currently on X11.

Last edited by DeepDayze (2024-09-13 17:07:57)

hhh · 2024-09-13 17:33:32

Just a reminder, our first priority for carbon this cycle is to release it nearly in sync with the release of trixie...

https://forums.bunsenlabs.org/viewtopic … 30#p135430

So, dependent on what Debian releases, if it's only a 64-bit Xorg ISO at first, so be it.

Bearded_Blunder · 2024-09-13 20:56:24

It'd be nice if a 32 bit version can be done even if it's some sort of netinstall rather than the full live session + installer, that said, it does rather depend what's happening upstream.

There are a few actual 32 bit machines still in use, not least an old Thinkpad about 2 feet to my right... So I'll have some motivation to see if I can contribute to the effort of making 32 bit work, I just hope I have the time in addition to motivation.

micko01 · 2024-09-13 23:37:09

Ben Hutchings wrote:

This is a heads-up that the kernel team is planning to stop building
i386 kernel packages shortly (probably starting with Linux 6.11).

i386. Does that mean no i686? As stated here. EDIT: pretty much 1 and the same I guess.

hhh wrote:

We'll have to wait and see. The current Release Notes list 32 bit as being supported...

Yes we will.

kernel.org/releases list 6.6 as the most recent LTS kernel released 2023-10-09 so over 11 months ago which makes the next (now at 6.11rc7) possibly the LTS release. Of course that is no certainty, but if it is, that would make debian maintenance for 32 bit kernel easier IMHO. However it is like everything in open source - we are volunteers and only have so much time to spare.

Last edited by micko01 (2024-09-14 00:03:36)

Bearded_Blunder · 2024-09-14 00:17:35

Debian have been labelling i686 as i386 for quite a while now, since they (inadvertently?) broke i386 support some years ago.

I may have to put the 486 hardware on Gentoo if BL/Debian becomes broken & that's effing painful.. compiling everything rather than just the kernel.. but once the 32 bit support for the kernel goes away in Debian, I can make the prophesy that 32 bit support goes away for many things, because why would the dev's bother when nobody can boot x86 32 bit hardware? Arm might continue, but someone with influence wants to create lots of x86 e-waste.

Last edited by Bearded_Blunder (2024-09-14 00:18:03)

johnraff · 2024-09-14 02:59:11

hhh wrote:

The current Release Notes list 32 bit as being supported...

My impression is that writing the Trixie Release Notes has been on low priority. Most of it still looks like a copy of Bookworm. I wouldn't rely on them for useful info until much nearer release time.

Maybe Debian will freeze a kernel for the 32 bit version.

Yes, it's a question of whether "stop building i386 kernel packages... starting with Linux 6.11" means keeping i386 6.10 kernels on the server or not.

The other question is whether getting no more kernel updates has security implications or not. I guess kernels on LTS releases like Bookworm will continue to get security patches, but as for Trixie...?

Otherwise, I agree that we should drop our 32 bit ISO to better focus on the transition to Wayland.

We might well have to do that.

I have a little 32bit laptop that's very light and easy to drop in a bag, also good for quick tests that need hardware (like that pesky battery icon). I'm planning to upgrade it from Boron to Carbon while it's still possible, but we'll have to see what happens after that. It still works perfectly so I'd hate to throw it away.

DeepDayze wrote:

Perhaps then at least for Trixie there would be a 6.10 LTS kernel for the 32 bit image that may well be the final 32 bit Debian installer image?

Having an installer is a different question again - even if there's a kernel, it would be up to the d-i devs whether they wanted to go on making 32bit installers. To be honest, my guess is they wouldn't. The d-i folks seem to be quite busy enough anyway. That applies to live-build too. Even if BL didn't have to build our own 32bit kernels for Carbon, we'd likely have extra work to do patching the installer and live-build scripts.

hhh wrote:

If Debian drops 32-bit for trixie, users with 32-bit systems should stick with boron/bullseyebookworm, who's end-of-life wont happen until about June of 2026...

This. Boron's a very nice system IMO.
(FIFY)

hhh wrote:

Just a reminder, our first priority for carbon this cycle is to release it nearly in sync with the release of trixie...

Yes! It would be super cool not to be 6 months behind for once.

Bearded_Blunder wrote:

It'd be nice if a 32 bit version can be done even if it's some sort of netinstall rather than the full live session + installer, that said, it does rather depend what's happening upstream.

The netinstall would presuppose a successful 32bit install of Debian Trixie via... a Debian Netinstall image? That's quite a presumption IMO. Unless some gnarly process of installing Debian Bookworm, then upgrading to Trixie could be got to work...

There are a few actual 32 bit machines still in use, not least an old Thinkpad about 2 feet to my right...

I quite share your feelings. I'd guess there are still a lot of 32bit boxes in use here and there.
If their work is not mission-critical and a network attack wouldn't be the end of the world, then maybe a lesser distro like DSL or Slitaz or... could remain an option?

micko01 wrote:

Ben Hutchings wrote:
This is a heads-up that the kernel team is planning to stop building
i386 kernel packages shortly (probably starting with Linux 6.11).
kernel.org/releases list 6.6 as the most recent LTS kernel released 2023-10-09 so over 11 months ago which makes the next (now at 6.11rc7) possibly the LTS release. Of course that is no certainty, but if it is, that would make debian maintenance for 32 bit kernel easier IMHO.

BH said they'd probably stop building i386 kernels at 6.11, which makes getting 6.11rc7, even if it is LTS, look a bit doubtful.
I don't think a home-brewed kernel is a realistic option for BL.
Currently Debian are offering 6.10.6 for i686, so that might well be the last.

Bearded_Blunder wrote:

Debian have been labelling i686 as i386 for quite a while now, since they (inadvertently?) broke i386 support some years ago.

From the mailing lists, it looked as if there was a deliberate decision to drop support for i386. The labelling confusion is a pain though, which continues to this day. Kernel packages have -686 or -686-pae in the name, while the architecture is referred to as i386.

...once the 32 bit support for the kernel goes away in Debian, I can make the prophesy that 32 bit support goes away for many things, because why would the dev's bother when nobody can boot x86 32 bit hardware?

Earlier mailing list post:

Paul Gevers wrote:

Insofar as they still do, we anticipate that the kernel, d-i and images teams
will cease to support i386 in the near future. Following that, there are two
routes into running i386:
1. as a multi-arch option on an otherwise amd64 system
2. as an i386 chroot on another architecture system

So while i386 packages will still be usable (but only on 64bit hardware), as you say @B_B there's probably little or no motivation for devs to go on maintaining them.

hhh · 2024-09-14 04:21:34

https://www.debugpoint.com/32-bit-linux-distributions/

So maybe a few of these will hold on, and you won't have to ditch you're old hardware just yet, even if Debian decides they will.

Nice to see us as number 8 on that list, but that doesn't mean we should try hard to continue support for 32-bit. We follow Debian stable, and we have enough troubles doing that as it is. If they drop it, so should we, IMO.

BTW, Arch ended support of 32-bit in 2017...

https://archlinux.org/news/the-end-of-i686-support/

johnraff · 2024-09-14 05:12:51

Whoo... the first four on that list + AntiX and BL are Debian based. That leaves only Void Linux, Porteus, Alpine Linux and Mageia.

If any of the debian-based distros start compiling their own i386 kernels we might possibly be able to latch on.

Otherwise, party's over.

hhh wrote:

We follow Debian stable, and we have enough troubles doing that as it is. If they drop it, so should we, IMO.

Regretfully agree.
"Debian Stable" is part of our mission statement IMO.

Last edited by johnraff (2024-09-14 05:14:51)

Bearded_Blunder · 2024-09-14 12:37:48

johnraff wrote:

he netinstall would presuppose a successful 32bit install of Debian Trixie via... a Debian Netinstall image? That's quite a presumption IMO. Unless some gnarly process of installing Debian Bookworm, then upgrading to Trixie could be got to work...

I recon such a gnarly upgrade during install thing is possible using a Bookworm iso & a preseed file, I've been meaning to take a swing at it, just in case that mini iso I found for installing 32 bit Trixie goes away.

That said if kernels go away it's game over, don't think we should get involved in compiling those, I certainly wouldn't be up for it, under which circumstance I can't really ask others to take on the task, there's enough on your plates as it is with Wayland incoming.

DeepDayze · 2024-09-15 01:02:32

For most 32 bit systems the 6.10.6 LTS kernel should cover most vulns as 32 bit machines are rather underpowered and are pretty old by now. The bookworm installer should be basically the way to bootstrap to Trixie and the LTS kernel should still be usable on Trixie...unless there's gotchas.

As @johnraff mentioned, the end of the road is very nigh for 32 bits on Debian, so to keep your favorite old 32 bitter running once Debian drops the hammer on 32 bit kernels and build infrastructure it then might need some hackery to do so.

Wayland is the future but it's only 64 bits.

Last edited by DeepDayze (2024-09-15 01:02:56)

johnraff · 2024-09-15 06:20:35

Bearded_Blunder wrote:

johnraff wrote:
...some gnarly process of installing Debian Bookworm, then upgrading to Trixie...
I recon such a gnarly upgrade during install thing is possible using a Bookworm iso & a preseed file, I've been meaning to take a swing at it, just in case that mini iso I found for installing 32 bit Trixie goes away.

The devs sound pretty determined that there will be no more 32bit kernels, installers or images, so I would give that mini iso just as long as it takes someone to find it's still on the server. If you want to continue playing with it, probably best to download a copy.

That said if kernels go away it's game over.

Yes. Certainly if the current Trixie i386 kernel is taken off the server.
If 6.10.6 stays up then it might be possible to cling to that, at least for Carbon. No longer.

DeepDayze wrote:

the LTS kernel should still be usable on Trixie...unless there's gotchas.

johnraff · 2024-09-15 06:36:50

From the debian-user mailing list:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/20 … 00535.html

The plans for the next release of Debian ("trixie") some time in
2025 do not include installer support for 32-bit x86 or a 32-bit x86
kernel, so the lifetime for a 32-bit kernel in Debian is now
bookworm plus the 5 years of its LTS. The expected long term route
to run 32-bit x86 software on Debian is on a 64-bit kernel.
As a result anything you install as 32-bit x86 now has no upgrade
path and quite limited support future. A 64-bit install has a more
promising future as the running of 32-bit packages is still planned
to be supported for quite a while to come.
Then there is the fact that the LTS team can and does mark packages
as unsupportable for the lifetime of LTS when they need to, so just
because LTS team exists doesn't mean they can get around to
supporting 32-bit x86 installer/kernel. I would not be at all
surprised if they gave up on it before the end of bookworm LTS.
Note also that the email from the release team was very
careful in its wording. When it said, "Insofar as they still do, we
anticipate that the kernel, d-i and images teams will cease to
support i386 in the near future" — this is your clue that very few
people are actually supporting this right now. Indeed, one reason
why 32-bit x86 support is being dropped (everywhere) isn't because
no one wants it or no one uses it, but because (close to) no one in
the upstream Linux kernel and toolchain community is supporting
it, which leads to it being unsupportable in Debian. Already, and
for a number of years before now.

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/20 … 00542.html

Once the LTS team takes over maintenance of a given release, the kernel
updates switch to a backport of the kernel from release+1. For instance,
with buster (which shipped with linux-4.19) since it switched to being
under the responsibility of the LTS team has received backports of
linux-5.10 (from bullseye). So, if you're thinking about the lifetime of
bullseye (which will extend another 2-ish years from now under LTS),
then it will receive backports of the bookworm kernel. If that kernel
version discontinues 32-bit support (to where it cannot be feasibly
maintained in bookworm), then it will likewise cease to have 32-bit
support in bullseye.
As far as installers, the LTS team does not produce installers. The
installer team's commitment is only for 3 years following release, so
whatever installers are available are the only ones which will be
available. But, as has been stated elsewhere in this discussion, new
installs of 32-bit x86 are not a good idea.

hhh · 2024-09-15 06:44:44

Off Topic... Who is Andy Smith? I can't find squat about him in regards to Debian, other than his mailing list posts.

https://www.debian.org/intro/organization

On topic, not looking good for 32-bit on trixie.

johnraff · 2024-09-15 07:49:48

That's the debian-user ML, so people who aren't Debian members like you and me post there. A lot of them are quite knowledgeable though.

#1 2024-09-13 07:28:08

No 32bit Carbon release?

#2 2024-09-13 14:00:07

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#3 2024-09-13 15:22:24

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#4 2024-09-13 16:21:00

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#5 2024-09-13 16:36:51

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#6 2024-09-13 16:59:59

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#7 2024-09-13 17:07:26

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#8 2024-09-13 17:33:32

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#9 2024-09-13 20:56:24

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#10 2024-09-13 23:37:09

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#11 2024-09-14 00:17:35

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#12 2024-09-14 02:59:11

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#13 2024-09-14 04:21:34

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#14 2024-09-14 05:12:51

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#15 2024-09-14 12:37:48

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#16 2024-09-15 01:02:32

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#17 2024-09-15 06:20:35

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#18 2024-09-15 06:36:50

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#19 2024-09-15 06:44:44

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

#20 2024-09-15 07:49:48

Re: No 32bit Carbon release?

Board footer