On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 04:01:54PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 04:37:32PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > > I see only one way to deal with that: drop security support for > > m68k. :-P > > That's not entirely unreasonable. Why should the m68k folks expect > the security team to maintan 2.2 when they are not willing to put in > the effort needd to make 2.6 run on their arch? Why not get a designated person from the m68k port to compile and test new kernel security updates. Is there some reason this is not possible or a good idea? Or is this already done? -- gram
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature