Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.devel > #108083
| From | Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.devel |
| Subject | Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) |
| Date | 2023-06-02 21:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <GCijU-dcJE-31@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <Gx8XU-a0uT-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <GBgtQ-cyCZ-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <GBryV-cFZn-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <GBByi-cM4v-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | The Debian Project, http://www.debian.org/ |
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 11:24:15PM +0200, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> On Wed May 31, 2023 at 12:44 PM CEST, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
[...]
> > 20+ year old machines are typically more power hungry, more expensive,
> > less performant, and less reliable than an up-to-date raspberry pi. If
> > you want to support people who can't afford shiny new hardware, I think
> > pointing them to raspberry pi-class hardware is a better idea than
[...]
> In the responses here, I've mostly seen the *assumption* that those old
> devices must be power hungry. While I'm quite sure modern hardware is
> more power *efficient*, that doesn't mean old hardware is thus power
> hungry.
> But most of all, I'm flabbergasted/annoyed that someone who made explicit and
> clear what they need, namely keeping support for i386, a bunch of people feel
> the need to respond like "Well, actually, you need this (other thing)".
> I find that extremely condescending.
That's actually a bit of a misrepresentation of what I said.
I do believe there are still people using i386 hardware. I know for a
fact that there are still people using m68k hardware, too.
My argument is that "it is still used" is an argument that, due to the
very fact that retrocomputing exists, will never be a wrong statement.
To name an extreme example, there exist a handful of apple I devices
that are in working order today, but nobody would reasonably suggest
that it is a platform that still matters today.
Since it is always possible to come up with an example of someone still
using some old piece of hardware, I therefore think that it is not a
very compelling argument, in and of itself.
I also specifically said that older systems *typically* require more
power for less performance (etc). Of course there are exceptions, but
those are much more rare than the more common case of 20 year old
desktop-class hardware.
As an ex contributor to the m68k port who was active on the port when
our buildd hosts were still running on actual m68k hardware, I can tell
you that 20 year old hardware is not reliable *at all*. I have forgotten
how many times we've had to scrounge for older hard drives to replace
ones that died, wiggle RAM modules around, or do various types of
insane hardware maintenance that on modern hardware just isn't
necessary (I ...<censored>... remember the one time where the one host
had to be moved because it was in a hot attic and the cooling system
had Opinions on having been run 24/7 for over a decade). As such, if
your choice is between a 20 year old piece of hardware or a brand new
one that has similar performance, your better choice is almost always
going to be the latter.
Note again how I said "almost always" here. Exceptions exist.
In my opinion, the question we should be asking ourselves is therefore
not "can we still find valid use cases for the port", because the answer
to that is always "yes" and therefore not interesting, but rather, "how
much effort will it cost us to keep the old port running".
Note that the answer to that very valid question will be influenced by
"who is interested in keeping the port available". If there is a strong
feeling that the i386 port needs to go, and there is a bunch of people
with the skills required and the interest in changing that, then there
is a fairly straightforward thing they can do to avoid the port being
binned. It requires you do lot of work, but "complain on -devel" is not
part of the job.
I was part of the team that kept doing the necessary work for years, and
we saved the port from being removed from Debian several times. If you
want to do the same for i386, the path is clear...
--
w@uter.{be,co.za}
wouter@{grep.be,fosdem.org,debian.org}
I will have a Tin-Actinium-Potassium mixture, thanks.
Back to linux.debian.devel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-17 06:20 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> - 2023-05-17 06:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal YunQiang Su <wzssyqa@gmail.com> - 2023-05-17 07:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-18 22:10 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Florian Lohoff <f@zz.de> - 2023-05-22 10:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-18 07:10 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> - 2023-05-18 12:10 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> - 2023-05-18 16:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> - 2023-05-18 18:20 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Olaf Titz <olaf@bigred.inka.de> - 2023-06-26 20:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> - 2023-05-18 16:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Christoph Biedl <debian.axhn@manchmal.in-ulm.de> - 2023-05-18 21:20 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> - 2023-05-18 21:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Helmut Grohne <helmut@subdivi.de> - 2023-05-17 11:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-18 07:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Helmut Grohne <helmut@subdivi.de> - 2023-05-28 21:20 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Craig Small <csmall@debian.org> - 2023-05-17 14:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-17 17:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> - 2023-05-18 03:10 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-18 21:10 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 05:40 +0200
i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2023-05-19 13:50 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 14:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2023-05-19 16:10 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2023-05-19 16:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 16:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2023-05-19 17:10 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2023-05-19 19:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> - 2023-05-25 13:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 17:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 18:00 +0200
partial support for i386 (Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal)) Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 19:50 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2023-05-22 12:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues <josch@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 17:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 18:00 +0200
Bug#1036358: release-notes: Debian 12 expected to be last release w/ installer for i386 Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org> - 2023-05-19 17:40 +0200
Re: Bug#1036358: release-notes: Debian 12 expected to be last release w/ installer for i386 Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 19:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2023-05-19 19:10 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 19:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 20:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2023-05-19 19:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Bjørn Mork <bjorn@mork.no> - 2023-05-19 21:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org> - 2023-05-19 22:00 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Bjørn Mork <bjorn@mork.no> - 2023-05-19 22:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> - 2023-05-20 07:10 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) James Addison <jay@jp-hosting.net> - 2023-05-20 14:00 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2023-05-31 01:00 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-31 06:00 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> - 2023-05-31 14:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Sven Hoexter <sven@stormbind.net> - 2023-05-31 16:20 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2023-05-31 18:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> - 2023-05-31 20:50 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org> - 2023-05-31 21:30 +0200
Re: Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues <josch@debian.org> - 2023-05-31 07:00 +0200
Re: Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) James Addison <jay@jp-hosting.net> - 2023-05-31 10:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> - 2023-05-31 12:50 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Alexandre Detiste <alexandre.detiste@gmail.com> - 2023-05-31 13:10 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Sven Hoexter <sven@stormbind.net> - 2023-05-31 16:10 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2023-05-31 18:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2023-05-31 23:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2023-06-01 00:20 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> - 2023-06-01 15:20 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) nick black <dankamongmen@gmail.com> - 2023-06-02 19:00 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> - 2023-06-02 21:10 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2023-06-02 23:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2023-06-01 03:40 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu> - 2023-06-01 14:20 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer <perezmeyer@gmail.com> - 2023-06-08 02:20 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 17:50 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2023-05-19 19:50 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> - 2023-05-19 20:10 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) James Addison <jay@jp-hosting.net> - 2023-05-19 20:50 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org> - 2023-05-20 00:00 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) James Addison <jay@jp-hosting.net> - 2023-05-21 08:00 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Roger Lynn <Roger@rilynn.me.uk> - 2023-05-26 01:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future (was Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) James Addison <jay@jp-hosting.net> - 2023-05-26 06:50 +0200
Using i386 by mistake on 64-bit hardware [was Re: i386 in the future 32-bit archs: a proposal)] Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2023-05-20 09:20 +0200
Re: Using i386 by mistake on 64-bit hardware [was Re: i386 in the future 32-bit archs: a proposal)] Simon Richter <sjr@debian.org> - 2023-05-20 11:30 +0200
Re: Using i386 by mistake on 64-bit hardware [was Re: i386 in the future 32-bit archs: a proposal)] Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> - 2023-05-20 18:50 +0200
Re: Using i386 by mistake on 64-bit hardware [was Re: i386 in the future 32-bit archs: a proposal)] Stephen Kitt <skitt@debian.org> - 2023-05-21 20:00 +0200
Re: Using i386 by mistake on 64-bit hardware [was Re: i386 in the future 32-bit archs: a proposal)] James Addison <jay@jp-hosting.net> - 2023-05-22 14:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> - 2023-05-20 05:30 +0200
Re: i386 in the future Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org> - 2023-05-20 10:00 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-23 03:20 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> - 2023-06-08 04:10 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-06-14 06:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> - 2023-06-17 17:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-18 08:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-20 02:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> - 2023-05-20 13:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Andreas Metzler <ametzler@bebt.de> - 2023-05-20 17:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-23 03:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-05-23 03:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Helmut Grohne <helmut@subdivi.de> - 2023-06-06 09:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2023-06-06 12:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> - 2023-06-06 13:10 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> - 2023-06-06 17:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2023-06-06 20:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2023-06-06 21:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Alexis Murzeau <amubtdx@gmail.com> - 2023-06-06 21:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2023-06-08 21:10 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2023-06-07 06:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Andreas Metzler <ametzler@bebt.de> - 2023-06-08 07:10 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2023-06-08 21:20 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2023-06-08 07:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Bastien ROUCARIES <roucaries.bastien@gmail.com> - 2023-06-08 08:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Hakan Bayındır <hakan@bayindir.org> - 2023-06-08 10:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2023-06-08 11:00 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2023-06-09 06:00 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2023-06-09 11:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org> - 2023-06-09 11:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2023-06-08 11:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2023-06-08 11:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2023-06-08 17:10 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal nick black <dankamongmen@gmail.com> - 2023-06-09 01:30 +0200
Re: multiarch vs. multilib Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2023-06-09 11:00 +0200
Re: multiarch vs. multilib nick black <dankamongmen@gmail.com> - 2023-06-11 10:00 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2023-06-09 05:20 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2023-06-09 11:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2023-06-09 06:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2023-06-09 08:00 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> - 2023-07-05 18:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-06-06 21:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2023-06-07 06:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Helmut Grohne <helmut@subdivi.de> - 2023-06-08 19:20 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2023-06-08 20:00 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-06-08 21:00 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Thorsten Glaser <tg@debian.org> - 2023-06-09 19:00 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org> - 2023-06-26 21:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal James Addison <jay@jp-hosting.net> - 2023-06-27 10:20 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2023-07-06 11:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Thorsten Glaser <tg@debian.org> - 2023-07-06 18:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2023-07-06 23:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Thorsten Glaser <tg@debian.org> - 2023-07-07 01:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2023-07-06 22:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2023-06-07 06:40 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Sune Vuorela <nospam@vuorela.dk> - 2023-06-07 09:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal "Peter Van Eynde" <pvaneynd@debian.org> - 2023-06-07 10:30 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2023-06-07 12:50 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2023-06-07 13:10 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Thorsten Glaser <tg@debian.org> - 2023-07-06 19:00 +0200
Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2023-07-06 19:20 +0200
[i386] adlibtracker2 and fp-units-i386 Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> - 2023-06-07 15:40 +0200
Constructive contributions (was: Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal) Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2023-06-09 13:30 +0200
csiph-web