From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Apr  1 16:02:24 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C35AB2DF;
 Mon,  1 Apr 2013 16:02:24 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
 [188.252.31.196])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46B13F4C;
 Mon,  1 Apr 2013 16:02:23 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.6/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r31G25mf097481;
 Mon, 1 Apr 2013 18:02:05 +0200 (CEST)
 (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost)
 by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.6/8.14.5/Submit) with ESMTP id r31G25Ji097478;
 Mon, 1 Apr 2013 18:02:05 +0200 (CEST)
 (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 18:02:05 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>
Subject: Re: considering i386 as a tier 1 architecture
In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgnYOwAPnpykTAN-Eu=oeee_uBMt1ud8U4RpyKLO5S257Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1304011759250.97433@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
References: <CAF6rxgnYOwAPnpykTAN-Eu=oeee_uBMt1ud8U4RpyKLO5S257Q@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
 (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [127.0.0.1]); Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:02:06 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:02:24 -0000

> Computers are getting faster, but also more memory intensive.  I
> can not find a laptop with less than 4 or 8 GB of RAM.  Modern
> browsers, such as Firefox, require a 64bit architecture and 8GB of
> RAM.

what? i rarely see firefox exceed 1GB and it is already way too much IMHO.

?  A 32 bit platform is not enough now a days on systems with
> more than 4 GB of RAM.

and never was.


> A 32 bit core now is like 640K of RAM in
> the 1990s.  Even in the embedded world ARM is going 64 bit with
> ARMv8.

but ALL NEW x86 computers have 64-bit instruction set.

> Secondly, the i386 port is unmaintained.  Very few developers run
> it, so it doesn't get the testing it deserves.  Almost every user
> post or bug report I see from a x86 compatible processor is running
> amd64.  When was the last time you booted i386 outside a virtual
> machine?

now 1 server running. because it's older and not 64-bit capable.

> and replace it with the ARM architecture as Tier 1.
true.

no need to support it as tier 1.

users of older hardware usually don't want to upgrade to latest freebsd 
kernel and userland.