Linux 7.2 has landed, dragging x86 timing clean out of the nineties by making the Time Stamp Counter mandatory.

I wrote up a quick article on why ditching those ancient legacy fallbacks is good housekeeping, plus a few other bits like cache-aware scheduling and memory tweaks worth noting.

Is anyone still using legacy hardware? If so, what do you use it for?

  • davidgro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    2 days ago

    I kinda miss the idea that the kernel would run on literally any hardware it ever did support, but I totally get it, especially now that there’s an emphasis on reducing attack surfaces.

    • offspec@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      23 hours ago

      I have some xeons in an old server running that I can’t update to the next version of Rocky because the kernel won’t support them :(

      • boonhet@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Isn’t that just Rocky configuring the kernel that way? You’re free to compile your own kernel and it’ll still support even old pentiums, just not i486 in new versions

  • refalo@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    Lots of retro enthusiasts still use legacy hardware for all sorts of reasons… I fear that a fork of the kernel will be necessary in the near future to keep these machines running.

    The notion of using Linux to revive old hardware and keep it out of the landfill may not last forever…

    • AudaciousArmadillo@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 day ago

      Or just don’t connect to the public internet and continue using a kernel that works? Even with internet, the attack vectors for such a machine are nearly non existent.

      • refalo@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        Security updates if you use it online or copy new binaries to run on it. Even if you’re not worried about hackers, there can still be viruses and malware that destroy your data.

    • menas@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      I do agree. Maybe I’m little paranoid, but I feel like in some years, recycle old chips will be the only IT available

    • tux0r@snac.rosaelefanten.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Just use NetBSD and never look back :)

      The notion of using Linux to revive old hardware and keep it out of the landfill may not last forever…

      Linux supports much less old hardware than its competitors.

      • mabeledo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        15 hours ago

        On the other hand, Linux runs more software than its competitors, and it’s not even close.

          • mabeledo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Emulation support doesn’t imply full ABI or driver support.

            Otherwise, since Proton is supported for Linux but not BSD, Linux would still be ahead.

            • Anti_Iridium@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 hours ago

              It’s much deeper than emulation like you would a PlayStation. Last time I checked you could run steam and proton on FreeBSD

              • mabeledo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 hours ago

                I know how it works. My point is that, if emulated software, be under a hypervisor or an ABI compatibility layer, is considered “supported”, then we could say that Windows applications are supported in Linux, but that’s not entirely true.

                More importantly, if I want to run Linux software, I would rather run it on Linux, e.g. Docker and Kubernetes.

  • tux0r@snac.rosaelefanten.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    “Finally! Linux supports even less hardware that will be supported by BSD for years to come! Hooray!”

    Because yay, planned obsolescence.

  • Maki@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    I use a Compaq CQ510-SD for writing. Lovely small keyboard, only has a resolution of 1024x600, but with some zoom configured in autostart that increases to twice that. It works as little more than a glorified text processor, but it suits my needs just fine while I can’t find its equal in the x64 or ARM market.

    • boonhet@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      But why does it need updates if it works? Just don’t connect it to the Internet and you can run it until either it dies or you die.

      • Maki@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I tend to write on it on the couch or at the library or wherever, and then use syncthing to sync with my desktop. This does require keeping syncthing updated.

    • sudoMakeUser@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      The keyboard does look lovely. Maybe a Chromebook with Linux? I don’t know what the Linux world is like for those. I’m sure you’ve looked at them before.

      • Maki@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        I did, yes. Finding a 12" or 13" mini-laptop is just tricky. Might need to build one of those custom clamshells.

    • Uncut_Lemon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I would recommend looking into the BSD’s, they have stronger support for older and unusual architectures. Something like nomadBSD, uses xfce on freeBSD

      • Maki@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        The problem is not software but hardware. The Compaq CQ510-SD is a nice compact design with round edges and small enough to fit in most any bag. Finding the same in a x64 system seems impossible. Hard edges, larger screens, flimsy chassis, or unuseable keyboards.

        • Uncut_Lemon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Well if you still like your hardware, and want continued, updated, software support, one of the BSD’s still likely to get you there for a bit longer. NetBSD likely being the one that drops it last.

          But at some point, as long as you able to do your work and copy data back and forth, does it matter. Even just running winXP or 7 will get you along for sometime.

          FreeDOS will always support x86, lol.

          At least you not running something with an old big edian PowerPC machine. Support for those suck!

          Does the machine a a socketed CPU, it appeared it runs the Core2 CPUs, if you get a core2duo, those support 64bit. I have a ThinkPad x60 with a 32bit Core2 CPU. It’s odd that there was 32bit only version of that class of CPU. I haven’t bothered to try upgrade it though.