On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 7:00 AM vvs vvs <vvs009(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sorry, but where did you saw that I said something about i686 *kernel*? I think
that I explicitly mentioned *x86_64* kernel with i686 userland and described why it could
be beneficial for some users with limited memory.
And a child with no vaccines isn't that much of a danger to the
community. Until someone opens a window, or forgets to wash a glass,
and the *other* unvaccinated children form a wonderful way to spread
an infection.
As for security, I don't think that running your own computer in
a tightly controlled environment should be *that* dangerous. At least many users did it
for years without problems. That looks like a scare. In either case it's the user who
should decide what's best for him. I don't think that educated grown-up people
should be treated like babies.
There is "deciding what's best for him". There is also "supporting
them inem in an unmaintainable and unsecurable environment, at the
expense of disk space and mirror space and build time and bugzilla
resources for a dangerously obsolete architecture.
Other distributions might drop it or not, we'll see. At least
Debian is not dropping it yet. But this is a moot point now. After all those discussions I
see that nobody really cares about user interests here. At least in Debian's case they
stated that their users interests is of utmost priority to them in contrast to just
useless technical innovation. And I'm not a proponent of consumerism. So take it
lightly.
The heck? If you know of others who need or want i686 architecture for
reasons other than theoretical completeness, please encourage them to
speak up. And offer to do some of the work.