Update: Canonical are now saying 32bit libraries will be "frozen" and not entirely dropped.
Original article:
Things are starting to get messy, after Canonical announced the end of 32bit support from Ubuntu 19.10 onwards, Valve have now responded.
Speaking on Twitter, Valve dev Pierre-Loup Griffais said:
Ubuntu 19.10 and future releases will not be officially supported by Steam or recommended to our users. We will evaluate ways to minimize breakage for existing users, but will also switch our focus to a different distribution, currently TBD.
I'm starting to think we might see a sharp U-turn from Canonical, as this is something that would hit them quite hard. Either way, the damage has been done.
I can't say I am surprised by Valve's response here. Canonical pretty clearly didn't think it through enough on how it would affect the desktop. It certainly seems like Canonical also didn't speak to enough developers first.
Perhaps this will give Valve a renewed focus on SteamOS? Interestingly, Valve are now funding some work on KWin (part of KDE).
Looks like I shall be distro hopping very soon…
To journalists from other websites reading: This does not mean the end of Linux support, Ubuntu is just one distribution.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Quoting: EikeQuoting: BeamboomIn a world of limited resources, spending a lot of those resources on backward compatibility can be argued is a energy wasted that could be spent a lot better.
I guess it depends on the value of the old stuff (high for many of us) and the prices for the different solutions to keep the value. The price for Ubuntu to keeping these libs seems not high for me, especially considering Debian still maintains them. The price of hundreds of thousands of people setting up VM (or the like) solutions seems a bit higher. Yes, we do need some other solution some day. I just don't think it's this day yet.
Uhm... How does 2/3rds or more of the Steam catalog sound to you as value?
0 Likes
Quoting: BeamboomDo I really need to explain that? Why do do think they want to do this to begin with? Why do we phase out technology quite regularly - despite the hard struggle every bloody time we do it?
Sadly, you do. Most don't get it unless they work in the trenches or paid attention to the woes of those that do.
QuoteIn a world of limited resources, spending a lot of those resources on backward compatibility can be argued is a energy wasted that could be spent a lot better. Especially now that those old blobs of binaries can be run in virtualized environments.
When they can manage the 3D support, etc. then, YEAH. There's quite the answer indeed. Likely to be the real one. Since they don't manage it well or at all...nope.
0 Likes
Quoting: svartalfQuoting: EikeI guess it depends on the value of the old stuff (high for many of us)
Uhm... How does 2/3rds or more of the Steam catalog sound to you as value?
Uhm... You did quote it...? (Quote shortened by me.)
Or do you mean to me personally? I'm torn... I tend to play games until I have finished/enough/given up and never revisit them. OTOH, I do want to be able to play them again. OTOH again, I guess I won't for all those 5 1/4 " discs either... But, yes, I want to keep being able to play 32 bit games.
0 Likes
slaapliedje Jun 24, 2019
Quoting: EikeSomeone should create a list of software (not just games) that would no longer work if 32bit compatibility libraries went away. Then send that to Ubuntu and they can decide whether or not dropping full support is worth it.Quoting: svartalfQuoting: EikeI guess it depends on the value of the old stuff (high for many of us)
Uhm... How does 2/3rds or more of the Steam catalog sound to you as value?
Uhm... You did quote it...? (Quote shortened by me.)
Or do you mean to me personally? I'm torn... I tend to play games until I have finished/enough/given up and never revisit them. OTOH, I do want to be able to play them again. OTOH again, I guess I won't for all those 5 1/4 " discs either... But, yes, I want to keep being able to play 32 bit games.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: TheSHEEEPI don't know about that. I've never had to check or ask myself whether a program uses 32-bit or 64-bit architecture because my 64-bit system can run both. That's hardly a bother for me as a user. No longer being able to run certain programs and finding out that they use older architecture, though... that would suck.Quoting: Purple Library GuyThat wouldn't serve any purpose, as it would only be for me. As I said, I'm looking at the bigger picture here.Quoting: TheSHEEEPI simply look beyond a few personal inconveniences at the bigger picture.Because . . . the libraries take up a few megs on your terabyte+ hard drive? Yeah, surely it's worth getting rid of some functionality to get that!!!
And the bigger picture is that progress requires sacrifice. Can't play some games/use some apps anymore? So be it, if that's the price to pay to finally get rid of old stuff like 32bit for good.
But you know, all you have to do is delete the relevant libs. Nobody's stopping you.
And the bigger picture is that right now, 32bit is like an annoying mosquito at the butt of many developers and users... just look at this very situation.
In my simple opinion, complaining about 32-bit being supported because you don't want to use it would be like complaining about a distro having printer drivers because you don't intend to print anything. If they bother you that much, you can remove them, but there are certainly enough users out there that need them to justify shipping them by default, or providing an easy way to install them (meaning they still have to be maintained anyway).
5 Likes, Who?
Quoting: GuestWith that what will be the new Popular Distro? Arch based distro? Debian?
Unless it's a simple to install and simple to maintain distro, it's not a real option. Vanilla Arch and Debian are painful to use as a newbie.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: Purple Library GuyQuoting: einherjarThanks Canonical :><:No doubt we will. But they will be fools to do so. Look, Microsoft and Apple make stupid decisions all the time. When they do, just exactly what can you do about it? Can you switch to a different Windows or Mac OS distro?
Now we will have lots of game devs and publishers saying:
"See, there is no reliable Distro in the Linux world. It doesn't make sense to ship software for Linux"
This is a time to celebrate the fact that Linux distros are not monopolies.
Like it or not, but with that small userbase it is also a disadvantage.
Developers and Companys like Adobe will be held away from bringing their software to Linux.
They want one reliable OS --> MS gives it to them.
We need a big popular and reliable Distro, to have enough marketshare and live the "diversity". With 1% marketshare distributed across more then 10 Distros, we will remain irrelevant (on Desktop) for most of the companies.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: einherjarThey want one reliable OS --> MS gives it to them.Do you mean Windows 7? Or 8.1? Or 10? Which build, 1703, 1709, 1803, 1809 or 1903? LTSC maybe? 32 bit or 64 bit?
Quoting: einherjarWe need a big popular and reliable Distro, to have enough marketshare and live the "diversity". With 1% marketshare distributed across more then 10 Distros, we will remain irrelevant (on Desktop) for most of the companies.How having many distros can harm Linux? Imagine if there is only one Linux distro, and that distro drops 32-bit support...
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: einherjarQuoting: Purple Library GuyQuoting: einherjarThanks Canonical :><:No doubt we will. But they will be fools to do so. Look, Microsoft and Apple make stupid decisions all the time. When they do, just exactly what can you do about it? Can you switch to a different Windows or Mac OS distro?
Now we will have lots of game devs and publishers saying:
"See, there is no reliable Distro in the Linux world. It doesn't make sense to ship software for Linux"
This is a time to celebrate the fact that Linux distros are not monopolies.
Like it or not, but with that small userbase it is also a disadvantage.
Developers and Companys like Adobe will be held away from bringing their software to Linux.
They want one reliable OS --> MS gives it to them.
We need a big popular and reliable Distro, to have enough marketshare and live the "diversity". With 1% marketshare distributed across more then 10 Distros, we will remain irrelevant (on Desktop) for most of the companies.
I believe Bryan Lunduke spoke about this in one of his Linux Sucks talks(name is ironic)
It is a two sided coin , a blessing and a curse.
People can modify something like Gnome all they want or they can fork it into Mate and Cinammon.
Same is true for distros. People can stick with one distro and customize it to their liking or fork/make their own.
The good thing is anybody is free to do what they want.
The bad thing is less manpower across the board.
Don't think this will go away any time soon.
2 Likes, Who?
doomiebaby Jun 25, 2019
Quoting: razing32I believe Bryan Lunduke spoke about this in one of his Linux Sucks talks(name is ironic)
It is a two sided coin , a blessing and a curse.
People can modify something like Gnome all they want or they can fork it into Mate and Cinammon.
Same is true for distros. People can stick with one distro and customize it to their liking or fork/make their own.
The good thing is anybody is free to do what they want.
The bad thing is less manpower across the board.
Don't think this will go away any time soon.
i hope it doesn't =P
0 Likes
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me