Finally, the release of antix26.
The iso antiX-26_x64-full.iso is available here
If you are using antiX26-rc1 it is possible to upgrade.
antiX is possibly the most innovative Linux distro. Worth a try.
antiX is known for being a lightweight system that supports older hardware well, but it can also be used as a daily driver in a newer computer.
I tried a bootable USB based on the 386_full.iso on my x64 laptop and desktop and it won’t boot (the x64 does). I used Balena Etcher on LMDE and rufus on Win 10 but the result is the same… Shouldn’t it work???
I am not sure if the 32 bit iso will boot on an x64 system.
To run 32 bit binaries a 64 bit system needs 32 bit comparability libraries… that is OK in a running 64 bit system … you can add the 32 bit libraries … but to boot an entire 32 bit iso? That is a different matter… the iso would nkt have the compatability libraries, I think.
Why would you want to do it?
You could use qemu and emulate a 386 and install the 32 bit iso in a 32 bit VM.
It works on Mint, i have a 64 bit capable computer running on 32 bit mint 19 because I have one very old software that I have not been able to update and use it 2 or 3 times a year so keep the computer just for that.
Is that the same thing as modern full 64 bit computer?
I think you may have one of those early 32/64 bit hybrids
Its about 5 years old, did not know hybrids existed.
OK, that does not explain it.
Maybe the 32 bit iso assumes legacy boot?
I still say that if one of the boot programs on that 32bit iso was compiled as straight 32 bit without compatability libraries, it will not run when dumped onto a 64 bit machine.
It does boot on an x64 compatible CPU (Atom 330 with support for EM64T) which is the machine I intended to test it on. I was trying to boot on a newer laptop just to see what Antix looked like. TBH I prefer LDME 6 (but it is going EOL in 2 months…). Thank you for your explanation, it does make sense.
MX is similar to LMDE and it includes some antiX utilities. MX and LMDE are much more works-out-of-the-box than antiX … just because antiX is a minimal distro so you will likely have to add things.
Yes, but MX Linux 25.1 (from Jan 2026) also abandoned i386. My last hope was Antix… It does work but the UI looks too odd to show off as an alternative to Windows 
I guess I will give MX Linux 23.6 i386 a go (it still has 2 years before EOL). Thanks!
You can install a modern 64 bit distribution and then use either vm running 32 bit OS, or install 32 bit compatibility libraries in your 64 bit OS to run this program. Which program is this, by the way?
Hi @archismanp, it is not a program. I was looking for a real 32bit distro to install on an old miniPC (ASRock ION 330 with an Intel Atom 330 CPU). My idea is to extend the life for a few years and for showing off to demonstrate to school kids that Linux can be up to date in 2026 with hardware that has been considered obsolete by Microsoft standards.
How much RAM do you have? Maybe you can install XFCE on latest AnTiX and make the UI cool enough https://np.reddit.com/r/unixporn/comments/1q54iir/xfce_yes_thats_simple_but_its_nice/
You can install xfce. There is some configuring needed, but it works fine on antiX26. I have tested it on antiX26rc1 … see here
The other good 32 bit Linux is Void. Void linux will run well on an older PC too, and you can have Xfce there too.
I only have 2GB RAM (and the max supported by the CPU is 4GB). I will look into Void and XFCE next. Thank you both!
Hi Neville
After testing Void (nice XFCE interface) which feels slower than MX Linux 23.6, my next step is to try Antix 26 32bit but using XFCE. Maybe it makes more sense to start from the core iso and add XFCE to a GUI-less OS instead of adding XFCE to the full OS? I am at ease with the command line as long as I can find a good cookbook 
On the other hand, maybe it is enough to add that intel_iommu option to Void Linux instead of switching to Antix?
You have seen this topic?
I think you are right… start with core iso.
Note the packages I needed to add to get Xfce functioning properly.
Yes Void configures Xfce well … so does MX. In antiX you get a raw Xfce which needs some configuring … especially in relation to doing filesystem mounts.
Looks like you will succeed with 32 bit Linux.
Yes you need a Recipe Book for CLI … noone can remember it all. Make notes… you will need to do it again someday.
Thank you @nevj for the quick answer and links.
You didn’t answer to my last point: “On the other hand, maybe it is enough to add that intel_iommu option to Void Linux instead of switching to Antix?”
Or any other switches that could improve usage on a 32bit CPU?
Sorry missed that.
That intel_iommu=off option was to enable debian-based distros to see my hotplug sata disks… I dont think Void needs it.
My Void is fast. I wonder if there is some other issue with your Void.? Did you do an update after the install in Void.
xbps-install -Su
You will have far less trouble with Xfce in Void, compared to antiX
I didn’t get to updating Void. It was just a first impression. I think I will give it another chance. I agree that it will probably be more stable than if I install XFCE on Antix. Thank you for your suggestions!