GNU bug report logs - #67535
ci.guix.gnu.org 'Cannot allocate memory' while building for i686-linux

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>

Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 20:56:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #20 received at 67535 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: guix-devel <at> gnu.org, 67535 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
Subject: Re: Does anyone use i686-linux? [was Re: bug#67535: ci.guix.gnu.org
 'Cannot allocate memory' while building for i686-linux]
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 14:33:59 +0200
Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il> writes:

> On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 02:51:49PM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote:
>> For a long time we've not been able to build linux-libre on i686-linux
>> because the source unpacking process runs out of memory.
>
> I believe if we limit the unpacking process to not more than 8 cores we
> can avoid that problem.
>
>> I'm forwarding this bug to guix-devel to get more attention.
>> 
>> Is anybody actually using i686-linux anymore? Or should we begin to
>> officially remove support for it?
>
> Keeping this to i686-linux specifically, what generation of hardware
> supports i686 but not x86_64? Some (very) quick checking on wikipedia
> suggests that the x60 from 2006 was either 32-bit or 64-bit, and I
> believe there was an atom chip from 2015 that was 32-bit. Specifically,
> that makes the newest hardware (at least from the CPU perspective) 10
> years old at least.

FWIW, I'm using one of those Atom chips in a netbook for an installation
of Sugar Desktop.  I upgrade it every few months or so.  If I'm the only
user of i686-linux I would not want to condemn the project to supporting
the architecture for my sake.

We have quite a few package failures on i686-linux, often because of
failing precision tests.  It may not be worth attempting to fix these
problems, e.g. for R, because it is very unlikely that people use R on
i686 machines.

> In terms of side-stepping the question, do we have enough x86_64
> hardware to continue to support i686 without degrading support for
> x86_64? (I ask this seriously, although I'm pretty certain the answer is
> we're well covered on that front.)

Support does not just mean dedicating build cycles to doomed builds, but
also dedicating people's time to wade through hundreds of failures for
little gain.  Perhaps our time is better spent supporting architectures
that still have a future.

-- 
Ricardo




This bug report was last modified 191 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.