From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter =?utf-8?q?M=C3=BCller?= To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Time is running out for 32-bit ARM Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2022 10:08:42 +0000 Message-ID: <540965b3-4417-8fb1-7802-a36f5fc63b93@ipfire.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5495178907024303052==" List-Id: --===============5495178907024303052== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello *, in January [1], we already discussed the situation of 32-bit ARM, and settled= on demoting this architecture as "legacy" on [2], and advising people from buyin= g new 32-bit ARM hardware in the wiki. To some extends, this architecture shares a similar fate than 32-bit Intel di= d: Security features are not backported to it, maintenance requires a lot of eff= ort due to missing upstream support, hardware base is diminishing, and its IPFire userbase does not justify the resources required for keeping the distribution reasonably maintained on this architecture. The other night, we have therefore agreed on putting an end to IPFire support= for 32-bit ARM, and take the question of the anticipated timeframe to this mailin= g list. [3] At the time of writing, Fireinfo reports 0.94% of all IPFire installations to= run on supported 32-bit ARM devices, to give you a figure. [4] Personally, since these devices are unlikely to run in enterprises or other c= ritical environments, I would be fine with announcing EOL for 32-bit ARM at the end of this year. However, as I am not running any affected IPFire installations, my opinion is biased - let's hear yours. :-) Thanks in advance for your reply, and best regards, Peter M=C3=BCller [1] https://wiki.ipfire.org/devel/telco/2022-01-03 [2] https://www.ipfire.org/download [3] https://wiki.ipfire.org/devel/telco/2022-08-01 [4] https://fireinfo.ipfire.org/ --===============5495178907024303052==--