Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] linux-2.4

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] linux-2.4
  • Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:10:39 +0100

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 04:39:49PM -0800, Eric Sandall wrote:
>
> Quoting Thomas Orgis <thomas-forum AT orgis.org>:
>
> > Am Thu, 19 Feb 2009 09:45:17 +0100
> > schrieb Treeve Jelbert <treeve AT scarlet.be>:
> >
> >> Is it time to drop support for linux-2.4.x?
> >> No other major distribution bothers with it now.
> >> Possibly move it into an unsupported branch?
> >
> > linux-2.4 on SMGL is at best extremely untested, and thus by
> > definition broken.
> > Unless of course, someone using a 2.4 kernel speaks up.
> > We keep the possibility to _not_ use udev and hal; 2.4 lovers can
> > then still install the kernel themselves (like several people do
> > with their regular 2.6 kernels anyway).
>
> Except part of the point is to cleanup glibc, without the 2.4 check in
> there a 2.4 kernel user won't be able to use our glibc, and so there
> should be *no* need to provide any non-2.6 features.
>
> 'course, udev and hal are optional for 2.6 anyways, so we just keep it
> that way. ;)
>
> I'm all for removing 2.4 support, though in the past I had wanted to
> keep it, I'm now leaning the other way. ;)

I agree. It's been several years since 2.6.0 came out, and I can't think
of any reason to still use 2.4.

--
Arwed v. Merkatz Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
http://www.sourcemage.org




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page