You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →


[–] Wuttier 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

I understand why the creators would choose to go in this direction, as time and money are precious, so might as well focus on the future. On the other hand, I thought it was very welcoming towards older machines, hence the warm welcome of this bare-bones linux. Am I wrong?


[–] Donbuster [S] 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Arch has always been primarily focused on minimalism, its true, but minimalism in the sense of lack of bloat, NOT minimalism for minimal resource usage and therefore max compatibility. That paradigm is better addressed by OpenBSD, Damn Small Linux, linux from scratch, and, to a lesser extent, debian.

Few machines need 32 bit support. Therefore it's bloat affecting the majority of the arch userbase. Someone will doubtless make a fork that keeps the legacy support.


[–] 3dk 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The idea is that those who want 32-bit Arch Linux will make it their own seperate thing, so it doesn't take up resources from the main project.