a certain type of linux dropped support for 32 bit

https://nerds.xyz/2025/07/gparted-live-1-7-0-linux-distro-drops-32-bit-support-and-improves-device-handling/

The 1.7.0 Linux release brings a few key changes, starting with the end of 32-bit support.

If you're still using old hardware (restricted to 32-bit) , you're officially out of luck.

This decision follows Debian's move to drop i386 kernel packages from its Sid repository. Because GParted Live is built on Debian Sid, it now ships only in 64-bit (amd64) versions.

This release also includes GParted 1.7.0 along with an updated Linux kernel, version 6.12.37.

Yeah, it's no longer 2010, sorry bud.

>>105898986 (OP)
i really hoped they did it much later

>devs dropping support for 16 bit linux

how the fuck am i gonna use my 8086 now

>>105899128
there never was a 16-bit version

>>105899142
>he doesn't know about ELKS

>da joos don't want to support my pentium 3 anymore now i can't larp as a schizoid millennial who needs to hide from da glowies

this isn't the first distro to drop 32bit releases, like arch dropped theirs back in 2017
>>105899346
some software won't work on a pentium 3 even on distros that support 32bit, because some programs like modern web browsers require sse2, which you need a pentium 4 for

>>105898986 (OP)
>If you're still using old hardware (restricted to 32-bit) , you're officially out of luck.
Pentium 4 HT was released 23 years ago and it has 64 bit support.

>>105898986 (OP)
*BSDs, aside for dragonfly, still support 32bit libs?

>>105899346
>This decision follows Debian's move to drop i386 kernel packages from its Sid repository.
the bigger news is debian dropping 32bit
it's ok though, there's always be other options as long as running new software on old computers makes any sense

also keep in mind this isn't related to multilib

>>105899370
web browsers isnt the most major obstacle, there is a chromium related browser that works without SSEs

(its slow but it works)

therefore it can be used on pentium 3

>>105899386
64bit capable cpus have been around a long time, but there were 32bit cpus still being sold at the same time. i think some of the latest 32bit ones were some atom netbooks or something in the late '00s maybe early '10s. not many however

>>105899390
BSDs do continue to support 32bit

>>105899404
I swear to god, this fucking clique that's controlling the linux ecosystem currently is making more to help revitalizing the BSD userbase than anything else in IT history. Linux is literally becoming nu-windows/microsoft and bsd projects nu-linux.

>>105898986 (OP)
>32bit
What are you gonna do with that Athlon XP 1.8GHz/Pentium 3 1.0Ghz, 256-512mb ram machines?
Athlon 64 came out in 2003.

Even a chiner 50$ phone is about x667 times faster than that, or 5$-10$ Raspberry Pi/Chiner clone board will get you way more horsepower EVEN if you emulate x86 on it.
Given the later, what is your reason to use that ancient hardware today?

>>105899474
Those cpu don't have minix running inside them anon

>>105899485
Oh don't worry, those x86 CPUs were already backdoored to hell.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/254/4

>>105899185
ELKS is still supported thoughbeit.

>>105899504
That's only for (((intel))) i would assume.

>>105899386
The LGA 775 P4s were 64-bit, but the Socket 478 P4s weren't. I'd know, I'm posting from one. And Intel Atoms kept being 32-bit until the 2010s.

>>105899436
no systemd either, in BSD

>>105899370
There are modern web browsers which don't require SSE. Its possible to build Palemoon for IA32 processors.

>>105899522
Nope, AMD was on govt contracts financial lifeline from early 90's till 2010's.
https://amdnano.com/news-release.php?id=57
Can't find shit at jewgle but back in the days on now-gone IT tech sites you would get AMD PR forwarded celebratory news on how many shekels they secured in their new US govt deals - ones that didn't include selling chips to govt mind you. Why would government pay them if they receive nothing in return?

>>105899392
Debian dropping support always sucks because any 3rd party distro can always end support at any time without any notice

>>105899522
yes, its only intel

AMD Thunderbird (1.4GHz was the highest?) literally contains zero surveillance systems

>>105899528
>buying and using failpentium 4 instead of athlon xp in early 2000's
Fucking dumbfuck, gorilla nigger-retard level.

Who is still using a 32 bit processor in current year?

>>105899474
>What are you gonna do with that Athlon XP 1.8GHz/Pentium 3 1.0Ghz, 256-512mb ram machines?
You do realize that many Pentium M and Pentium 4 processors were 32-bit, right? Anyways I use mine for all the things you'd use any other computer for. Sometimes I'm posting on basket weaving forums, sometimes I'm writing, programming, burning CDs, playing games, converting video files, downloading movies, listening to music. My computer can do most of the things yours can.
>Given the later, what is your reason to use that ancient hardware today?
It keeps them out of the landfill, its fun, I like them

>>105899585
Pentium M laptop is probably more environmental friendly to use than any modern laptop, they were very power efficient single cores

>>105899402
Intel atom is so garbage that it should be considered a war crime to sell it.

>>105899570
Me.
>>105899568
I got it for $6 at a yard sale with a monitor and speakers.

>>105899604
while this is true, Pentium M was awesome

I wish there would have been a proper dual core version but they came just around the time when single cores were about to be ditched completely

>>105899585
i doubt 32bit support will leave linux (kernel) any time soon, there'll always be 32bit distros for older computers as long as that exists. it looks like it's going away because it tends to be the bigger distros which drop older hardware first, which makes it look worse than it really is. the fact is, using a 32bit computer today is niche, so you should expect to need to use more niche distros, or semi-niche distros, like archlinux32 is unofficial, but basically just regular arch, so is not really niche in usage, only niche in that it's not official so is technically a smaller group separate from arch

>>105899614
Pentium M dual core was renamed to Core Duo, you may have heard of it

>>105899607
It ain't even worth that, they should've paid you to take that p4 off their hands.
>>105899585
>unironically using P4s, that at 3GHz would take 150W while being slower than 1.5GHz athlon xp's that were running at... 30W.
Also
>pentium M
Laptop users deserve death by firing squad, just like phoneposters.

>>105899604
They're not that bad. They're quite nice for what they are, which is a super low power consumption x86 CPU. They still haven't been topped to this day on that front. Most of them were in the 4 to 6 watt range, and the lowest was 2 watts. These days, Intel's lowest power x86 stuff is 15 watts.

They match mid range P4s and exceed the fastest P3s while having much newer instruction sets. Considering when they released that was very impressive. Imagine if Intel launched a 5 watt TDP CPU that gave equivalent performance to an i7 from five years ago.

>>105899631
32-bit core duo is extremely rare find

and we were talking about 32-bits mainly

>>105899645
NTA but you are talking from completely different usage perspective, if you install some low resource consuming loonix distro then sure they will run, but that are less than 1% of all Atom users.
They were always notoriously paired with Wangblows versions that they were incapable of running smoothly (mostly because Jewtel make arbitrarily limitation on how much RAM can manufacturers out with those machines... not enough for wangblows minimum requirements).
Given that they were useless crap for 99.5% of people that bought them.

>>105899625
I know, I'm just worried that its going to kill the vintage hardware distros since they're almost all debian based. Ubuntu dropping 32-bit support killed all the Ubuntu based vintage hardware distros. If that happens all that'll be left is semi functional bare minimum distros like Arch32, and Gentoo (listed separate from the barely functional distros).

>>105899645
>atoms use 4 watts

while its true, the 1GHz Pentium M model used only 6 watts which isnt much more than atom and its incredibly faster than Atom

1GHz Pentium M would be on the level of 3GHz Atom but we will never know exactly because atoms capped at way lower MHz than 3GHz, something like 2.5GHz probably

>>105899666
Isn't running modern distros on vintage hardware a huge pain in the ass anyway? Assuming you want full experience like hardware acceleration working, etc.

>>105899640
>that at 3GHz would take 150W while being slower than 1.5GHz athlon xp's that were running at... 30W
Mine only uses 60 watts. Even the 3.4 Ghz extreme edition only draws 110 watts. Its the Pentium Ds that draw those crazy wattages.
>It ain't even worth that, they should've paid you to take that p4 off their hands.
Its a fine computer. The only problem it has the lack of a PCIE or AGP slot, which is more to do with Dell being cheap on their mother boards than with the CPU.

>>105899680
>while its true, the 1GHz Pentium M model used only 6 watts which isnt much more than atom and its incredibly faster than Atom
Do you have any citation for this?

>>105899692
>33mhz PCI, that shares bandwidth with all other PCI pheripherials
Oh dog what the fuck are you doing with this machine.
You could build for 10-15$ bux a first gen i5/i7 Xeon rig cpu+ H55 mobo+8gb of regular ddr3 with free shipping from ebay/ali.
That comes with PCIE 3.0, 64bit, and all other crap.

>>105899692
>it has the lack of a PCIE or AGP slot,

how does this happen

>>105899665
I have an EeePC with Windows 7 on it and it runs fine. Its a sluggish on modern webpages because of modern jeetcode, but running local programs and the OS itself its perfectly fine. And I've seen slower models run great with XP.

>>105899706
look at this comparison between Pentium M and an Atom at relatively same clock speeds and think about the difference in single core processing (which hugely favors Pentium M)

atom is terrible

>>105899687
Hardware acceleration is mostly a kernel thing. So its pretty distro agnostic. Either the kernel supports it and you're good or it doesn't and you're fucked. P4 era hardware tends to just work. P3 stuff is where the issues start, since anything pre Radeon has been unsupported for over a decade. Nvidia cards have better support though, with anything Riva TNT or newer still working.

>>105899721
Or perhaps you are just used to local programs taking forever to open up, run, alt tab between them.
If your eeepc is limited to 1GB just like most of that was back in the days, that's not enough for 7.
Back when I had machine with 3GB of RAM I would dualboot back the fuck to XP 32bit and run 7 only occasionally for 64bit-only games n shit. Due to RAM alone, 3GB wasn't enough for comfortable web browsing+kiketube on 7.

>>105899715
Some PCs are just older than the wide adoption of the AGP bus. Others just weren't meant for gaming. This one is a cheapo Dell Dimension, so I think it was a cost saving measure
>>105899712
I have a Haswell system setting two feet above it. I use this one because I like it. It looks cool

>>105899738
Mine has 2GB and 32-bit Windows 7. 32-bit Windows is a lot less RAM intensive than 64-bit.

>>105899762
>I subject myself to masochism just because I like how the pc case of that computer looks.
Anon, I think you need to seek out help.

>>105899729
I really don't trust userbenchmark. They give really weird results sometimes, especially on obscure, old, and low end CPUs like these. Besides the N270 was an early model. They made a bunch more generations after that. They even made a few dual core ones.

>>105899770
That's still a turd. Fully patched up SP3 XP 32bit will take WITH drivers for dedicated GPU+sound+net+chipset+other abomination HW drivers about 250-300mb of RAM.
Can you even get your 7 down to 1GB with all of the drivers present?

>>105899772
>having a hobby is mental illness
its not like I have to wait hours to open a webpage. Like I said, its very usable. You just have figure out how to use it. Some people like to install Gentoo. I like to make 20 year old hardware do modern tasks.

I seem to remember the discussion recently about Steam remaining a 32bit application rather than a 64bit one, and the need to 32bit libs; something similar with Wine/Proton compatibility I think. I would be nice if they could all move beyond it and instead use some sort of seamless WOW64 style thing?

>>105899528
>LGA775
I'm very impressed that the now ancient SAMBA / NFS file server I clumsily set up on my first real Arch install , is still dutifully running along. Its CPUs were a
>Core 2 Quad Q6600
>Core 2 Quad Q9550 I think.
Intel really did some exceptional work in the Core era, but especially when the Core i7 series would soon arrive especially Nahalem and X58 - back in the day when HEDT arrived with the newest technology first before the mainstream platform, had features that differed significantly and great performance, yet was relatively reasonably priced; an excellent investment for enthusiasts.

>>105899798
That's not hobby. Hobby would be running vintage era correct software on that PC, not seething about 2025 software not working on 1993-2002 hardware.
As much as I hate planned obsolescence, this can't be called it.

>>105899346
I look like this and say this.

>>105899784
My EeePC is currently using 632MB at idle.

>>105899820
ProcessExplorer pic or didn't happen.

>>105899811
I'm not Op. I don't have Linux installed on this thing currently. I just think its a shame that Linux is slowly but surely dropping support for legacy hardware.

>>105899840
It was bound to happen, I have high doubt that most of their 32bit software even runs on 32bit systems, because they don't have testers/devs running such old platforms to check it (testing it on modern CPUs doesn't guarantee it will work on vintage ones at all, ESPECIALLY for OSes due to bootloader differences alone).
They basically ship whatever the compiler spits out as long as it builds it.

>>105899840
>>105899867
in the future linux is no longer option, we need to start using widnows xp

>>105899831
What do I win?

>>105899873
I already use it on my retro PC. I just think its fun. Its like driving to the grocery store in a Model T.
>>105899867
My main concern is that distros which do actively test and maintain this support like Q4OS and Antix will be unable to continue doing so because they're Debian based. (though Antix has a few degrees of separation)

>>105899938
A nothingburger, that would be still 900mb, your wangblows just moved 200mb off to pagefile (if you have old HDD instead of modern SSD in that machine you will feel it once you run and alt tab between minimized programs).
Actually you win having now a good program on your PC (process explorer is based).
I could reboot to 7 64bit for shit and giggles to show you how much it takes on modern hardware.

>4571 days 20 hours 24 minutes remaining
tick tock 32-bit fags...

>>105899963
Isn't there some other overflow that will render 32bit systems inoperable already this decade?

>>105899436
anon your pentium 3 server is ewaste. it's time to let go.

>>105899957
I have Windows 7 on my Haswell machine. You don't have to tell me how much faster it is, I already know. I just don't think it's slow enough to be unpleasant. I guess alt tabbing might be slow if I really wanted to tax the ram, but I can't imagine having more than three programs running at any given time. This thing is basically just for typing documents and programming, and I occasionally use it for web browsing and playing old PC games.

>>105899979
Still works, until gets irreparably damaged i WILL keep using my old machines.

you should really be running a retro OS on your retro hardware if you're going to be a retro hipster.

>>105899969
32 bit systems were already patched though

>>105898986 (OP)
What you gonna do after 2038?
That's just 12 years away, and people need to move away from 32 bit.

>>105900036
>time is signed
cniles moment

>>105900036
Wouldn't this be really easy to fix in software? In fact, don't Windows and Linux already have solutions for thin on 32-bit machines?

>>105898986 (OP)
Linux Mint DEbian
LMDE
supports 32-bit

>>105900059
Not for the old code.
Are you ready to replace all your 32bit programs with ones coded with that in mind just recently?
No? Thought so.
Yes? Then why are you even using 32bit legacy hardware at that point if you gonna try to replace all your legacy shit with modern shit in it.

>>105900085
They all do for now. But for Trixie, they won't.
I expect at least the "unofficial" status for the kernel.

>>105900092
Hasn't Linux had the solution to this for a long time? Even if it doesn't, how much legacy stuff requires perfect time keeping?

>>105899979
>>105900009
Of all old 32 bit machines, the PIII had the most sovl. The near 1GHz models with the 133 FSB were literally picrel, tight as fuck and cannot be beaten in its niche. Its legacy lives on in later designs with the rejection of the "clock wars" pipelines which dual PIIIs thrashed even outclocked 2:1. A dual core PIII with 4GB RAM was so fucking fast in its day it puts all this pussy ass modern shit to rest.

Too bad i686 sucked dick and amd64 (aka EM64T aka x86-64) with its more registers and less fragmented feature set killed it off. Some kind of mezzanine past where PIII expanded to 32 64-bit registers yet plowed through 32 bit x86 code would have been kino, maybe with 4 x 667 MHz PIII quads running BeOS who knows. What actually happened is OK with me, though.

t. bought 12 core 9700K 5GHz tower with 64GB ECC for $287 on ebay

>>105900200
Daily reminder for zoomlings that Jewtel had to discontinue 1.3GHz P3s super early because they were beating hard all of the fastest available at the time 2.0GHz P4s.
Also clock for clock, Athlons were faster than P3s, further cementing it in Athlon XP era when their low clock CPUs were completely obliterating even 3.6GHz P4s, with Jewtel having only "muh video encoding benchmarks" as the only cope remaining.

>>105900218
I thought its that they were beating similarly clocked P4s.

>>105900218
"it's a complicated feel"

>>105899805
>I seem to remember the discussion recently about Steam remaining a 32bit application rather than a 64bit one, and the need to 32bit libs; something similar with Wine/Proton compatibility I think. I would be nice if they could all move beyond it and instead use some sort of seamless WOW64 style thing?
i don't know why steam doesn't have a 64bit version. wine has has WoW64 support for a long time now, and more recently has been working on a new kind of WoW64 which does some magic to make 32bit windows programs work using 64bit linux libraries

>>105899963
if you're talking about 32bit time, linux has supported 64bit time on 32bit systems since 5.6

>>105900329
take a MHz rating of P3 and add +600MHz to it and you get the P4 equivalnt

so: 1400 MHz Tualatin = 2000 MHz P4

HOWEVER P3 was faster at floating point calculations in such a way that 1400MHz P3 beats 2800MHz P4 at floater

but P4 was ok with integer, therefore 1400MHz P3 would be equal to 2000 MHz P4 in a 32-bit integer calcluation

P4 had one weird trick though it was absolute beast at creating IDEA cryptography, better than other CPUs which have been made, this on itself is useless knowledge htough

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Data_Encryption_Algorithm

(eventhough IDEA is spoken of as 64bit block thingy, it can be executed in 32-bits when encoding and decoding)

>>105899142
Nerd emoji

>>105900329
P4s were a complete lemon.
Here have some ancient benchmark, from site that used to favor Intel (mind you!).
Athlon 3000+ runs at 2167MHz btw.

>>105900420
we're not on facebook

>>105898986 (OP)
Gentoo still supports everything.

>>105900444
You might not be, but I'm posting from FB rn

>>105900411
>>105900423
>but P4 was ok with integer, therefore 1400MHz P3 would be equal to 2000 MHz P4 in a 32-bit integer calcluation
To add to this - games ever since Pentium 1 era were and still are very heavy on the float operations, with int ops being just marginal.
That's why in 3D operations and in vidya gaemz P3 along with Athlons were completely obliterating P4s.

Also it's the reason why AMD Bulldozer FX was a slow ass Faildozer, getting whooped by even priced/cheaper Jewtels of the time. Faildozer had it's float ops units cut in half so that an 8 core FX cpu was in fact a 4 cores cpu in games, 6 cores becoming 3 cores cpu and so on. Plus they were slow per clock, it was truly AMDs time to LARP as a P4 successor.
All the FX Faildozer shills on /g/ were tricking you into buying inferior, overpriced cpu.

>>105900577
Faildozer was a weird experience after owning DDR2 type Phenom previously

Its like most things became worse when using it

>>105900674
It did. The rare pepe 6 cores Phenom II is still beating 8 cores faildozer in vidya gaemz. Given that Phenom IIs performance wise were faster than Core2Duo/Quads, but slower than first gen i5/i7 that is pathetic for the FXs that came out during 2nd gen/3rd gen i5/i7 era.

>>105900735
https://wccftech.com/amd-bulldozer-fx8150-pitted-phenom-ii-x6-1100t-clocktoclock-benchmark-comparison/

>>105900750
>>105900674
Also the Stalker test they did was GPU limited, as they ran max settings with AA.
CPU tests are supposed to drop down grafix details until CPU becomes the performance limiting factor and not the graphics card.

Finding still existing PII + Faildozer vidya tests is a damn trouble, but I found some here and it's looking terrible for FX lmao
(note that PIIx6 is running 0.8GHz slower than the FX!)

>>105900793
>>105900674