[CentOS-devel] How altarch will be in CentOS 8?

[Johnny Hughes]

On 6/3/19 6:50 AM, Trevor Hemsley via CentOS-devel wrote:
> On 03/06/2019 12:32, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
>> On 03/06/2019 09:38, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
>>> CentOS 7 supports several architectures:
>>>
>>> - x86-64
>>> - aarch64
>>> - ppc64le
>>> - armhfp
>>> - i386
>>> - ppc64
>>> - power9
> 
> Perhaps we should start by looking at that list and deciding which of
> them will be supported in el8.
> 
> Are all of ppc64le/ppc64 and power9 all going to be valid architectures
> in el8?
> 
> Is it now time to retire i386 - 32 bit Intel? The last mainstream Intel
> processors that were 32 bit only were manufactured in 2005. Yes, there
> are some outliers like laptop chips and a few ancient atoms that were 32
> bit only for a few more years but the majority of 32 bit only processors
> are now 14 years old and will be 24 by the time CentOS 8 goes EOL. I
> would suggest that this is put out to grass and left to die. CentOS 7
> i386 will be still be around until 2024 when those 32 bit processors
> will be close to 20 years old.

Yes .. no more i386 as a separate arch.

Power9 is now part of ppc64le proper .. in el7 it required a specail
kernel and qemu .. in el8, power8 ppc64le and power9 ppc64le are in the
same tree.  There is no ppc64

So the arches are x86_64 (with i686 multi library support), ppc64le (for
both p8 and p9), aarch64 (all upstream arches as well) .. and armhfp as
a secondary / unique arch.

We do not currently have a plan to build s390x .. but I would not rule
out the possibility.

All but armhfp is also supported as an arch in RHEL-8.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20190604/a87a36cb/attachment.sig>