Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:43:10AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 01:28:15PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Op ma, 14-03-2005 te 16:09 -0800, schreef Steve Langasek:
> > > You do know that m68k is the only architecture still carrying around
> > > 2.*2* kernels in sarge?
>
> > False. See sparc32.
>
> $ madison -a sparc -s testing -r 'kernel.*2\.2'
> $
>
> ?
>
> > Even if it is true that we do still carry 2.2 into sarge, that is only
> > for Mac; not for any of the other subarchitectures.
>
> Nevertheless, it is a factor that contributes negatively to the
> maintainability of a stable release...
Well, we could drop mac/m68k supported subarch then ?
For that matter, it would probably make sense to drop 2.4 kernels fully in the
not so far future.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: