Hello,

This survey was created to understand the need for Slackware arm aarch32 current for users, and what percentage of users are planning to buy on ARM processors aarch32.

Personally feel nobody except those on very limited budgets would buy 32bit today. The need, if one exists is for people who already have them.

I personally have to manage many ARM-Aarch32 single-boards, some with still ARMv5 processor, and some other with ARMv7 processors. Actually I plan to buy new low-budget ARM aarch32 based board for something like IoT (not really IoT, but they serve as bridge for BLE devices). They are the cheapest board.

But... I have compiled my own Slackware-based distribution, so not really a need since already updated to -current:
ARMv5 (32bit soft-float): https://bonslack.org/bonslack_armv5te-current/
ARMv7 (32bit hard-float): https://bonslack.org/bonslack_armv7hl-current/
ARMv8 (64bit): https://bonslack.org/bonslack_aarch64-current/

Here, I’m talking about the same, there is a moment when it makes sense to take ARMV7, but you can’t put a fresh council on such a fee. I have 2 favorites of CRUX-ARM, which has not yet refused Aarch32.

Based on Changelog, your Current is 15.0 with updates. But by files this is still a full Current.

1 members found this post helpful.

Opppsss... Forgot to relink the ChangeLog.txt when transitioning from 15.0 to current... Many thanks for spotting it! Now it is updated (anyway, it is a simple copy of the official Slackware's ChangeLog.txt).

Lots of arm32 ( both v7 and <=v6 ) boards out there very competently doing "boring" jobs.

Giving Stuart beer and electricity money to continue support makes more sense than pointlessly sending them to landfill just to replace with more powerful machines that sit near idle all the time.

Thank you Stuart

3 members found this post helpful.

I'm the maintainer of an unofficial port of Libreelec for Android TV Box with Rockchip 3228 SOC (a 32-bit arm-v7).
In terms of functionality it's slightly superior to a raspberry 3.
Hardware is inexpensive but poorly maintained original firmware. So by installing linux it's possible to prevent them from ending up in the trash.
I had started working on a slackware 15 image, but somewhere I read that support for 32-bit arm architectures was in question and I gave up..
So from my point of view it would be useful to keep maintaining the 32bit port.

Thank you Stuart

1 members found this post helpful.

Actually there are 4 porting still supported for ARM 32 bits (2 official, 2 unofficial):
- v5te, soft-float, supported 14.2 (official): http://ftp.arm.slackware.com/slackwa...kwarearm-14.2/
- v7, hard-float, supported 15.0 (official): http://ftp.arm.slackware.com/slackwa...kwarearm-15.0/
- v5te, soft-float, supported 14.2, 15.0, current (unofficial): https://bonslack.org/bonslack_armv5te-current/
- v7, hard-float, supported 14.2, 15.0, current (unofficial): https://bonslack.org/bonslack_armv7hl-current/

Creating a Slackware porting is super-easy, because the main job is done by the core Slackware team.

I actually maintain unofficial Slackware porting for a total of 17 architectures/variants (Alpha, ARMv5, ARMv7, ARMv8, LoongArch64, MIPS, MIPSel, MIPS64el, OpenRISC, PPC, PPC64, PPC64le, RISC-V64, SH4, SPARC64, z/Architecture): https://bonslack.org/
The build scripts are the same as Slackware official sources, plus few additional configurations/patches to disable x86 specific code compilation. And this is a single-person job, with very few resources to compile packages (1 x86_64 PC + 4 single-board PC: OrangePI-PC, OrangePI-Prime, Nezha, Seagate GO-FlexNet).

I need Slackware porting especially for ARM 32-bit (both v5/v7), because I have many system with 32-bit processor that I need to maintain with the latest software versions and security patches.

So, I think we need a 32-bit Slackware ARM porting, but actually we already have some choice, so I think you can safely use Slackware 15.0 and/or current: it will be maintained by someone, should he/she be Stuart or someone else like me that needs Slackware porting for these architectures.

1 members found this post helpful.

Hi @lucabon, thanks for the info.
I have done a removable media creator (sdcard in this case) where the kernel is packaged and the bootloader and the slackware minirootfs for arm are installed.
It is not my intention to maintain a distribution (mainly due to lack of time). Of course, official support would be great, but if you tell me that stuff like that can be done with your port too, I'll take that into consideration.

1 members found this post helpful.

you can use the assembler by changing the settings for downloading packages

1 members found this post helpful.