[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Officially drop Linux 2.0 support? (was Some /usr/doc NMUs coming up)

On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 10:15:10 +0100
cjw44@flatline.org.uk (Colin Watson) wrote:

> Edward Betts <edward@debian.org> wrote:
> >Colin Watson <cjw44@flatline.org.uk> wrote:
> >> Edward Betts <edward@debian.org> wrote:
> >> >Another thought, bridge contains the userspace tools for operating an
> >> >ethernet bridge on Linux 2.0, we have have not supported the 1.x
> >> >versions of the Linux kernel for some time, is it about time that we
> >> >dropped the support for version 2.0?
> >> 
> >> Hmm, the modutils in woody doesn't support 2.0. Should we remove bridge,
> >> then? No-one seems to have been interested in adopting it for quite some
> >> time.
> >
> >In that case I suggest that we remove bridge, and make it official that the
> >next release of Debian will only versions of Linux supported are 2.2 and 2.4.
> >
> >Are there any other packages that only support Linux 2.0?
> At least the following binary packages:
>   arla-modules-2.0.36
>   ftape-tools (?)
>   ibcs-source-2.0
>   ipautofw (?)
>   ipfwadm (will this work with 2.4's compatibility mode? If so keep it)
>   kernel-doc-2.0.36
>   kernel-headers-2.0.36
>   kernel-patch-2.0.36-m68k
>   kernel-patch-2.0.37-raid
>   kernel-source-2.0.36
> This should definitely be discussed on debian-devel, though (cc'ed).

If the general sentiment is what I think it is, then I agree: LAY IT TO REST
ALREADY. Linux 2.0 and 2.2 are both obsolete. There's very, very little sense
in keeping either around. I can imagine some people screaming bloody murder if
support for 2.2 was removed, but 2.0 has _got_ to go.

And that would pretty well get rid of all those crufty packages and reduce
the archive size. Which is always a good thing. Usually.

This is, however, my _personal_opinion_ and there will probably be very good
reasons against it. Let the debate begin!



Reply to: