Re: would anybody use binary packages for NetBSD/i386 10?

[David Brownlee <abs%absd.org@localhost>]

On Sun, 13 Aug 2023 at 13:32, Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:
>
> In contemplating bulk builds and resources, I wonder if there are still
> people who:
>
>   are running NetBSD/i386 (as opposed to amd64)
>
>   are using the binary packges from quarterly branches on ftp.netbsd.org
>
>   are running NetBSD 10 already, or who intend to move to it soon or
>   after release
>
> If you have a system that meets the above, please either reply here (the
> first few people :-) or just answer me privately.  (I'd also be
> interested in which category below your use is.)
>
> Basically, I would think about not doing bulk builds if very few want
> them, relative to the effort/resources required to create them.
>
> My guess is that at this point, i386 use is limited to
>
>   a) old embedded-type systems (soekris)
>   b) systems that are running i386 because they were first installed many
>      years ago and haven't been converted to amd64 for no good reason or
>      for some odd special case odd reason
>   c) build systems to support category a/b systems, for testing or
>      building private binary package sets
>   d) retrocomputing

I have a mixed set of pc-engine alix (32 bit) & apu2 (64 bit) devices
in service, for which we use a common 32 bit image, based on a
customised netbsd-9.3 install with packages via pkgin. I'm definitely
planning on moving these to netbsd-10 to open up the option of
switching from openvpn to wireguard, and now the openssl pullup is
complete I might well start testing on that before the netbsd-10
release.

I also think there are a potentially interesting (if small) set of
people who would like a desktop with minimal web browser on an older
32bit x86 system, and NetBSD + ArcticFox pretty much delivers on that

David