Re: And now for something completely different... etch!
On Tuesday 07 June 2005 19:12, Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 01:47:12AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On Jun 07, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > - _No_ bugs in base packages (well, at least no old bugs). Base system
> > > should be upgraded to latest upstream (forward patches!) this
> > > includes PAM, modutils...
> > In my wishlist there is NO support of 2.4 kernels, so modutils would
> > become unneeded.
> > 2.4.x kernels are already obsolete by now except that for some doorstop
> > architectures, I do not know about any other modern distribution which
> > still installs one.
> Since (at least) potato, Debian has always supported more than one major
> line of kernels. I don't see why we suddenly would need to change that
For architectures that require older kernels we can keep them. But for i386
and other platforms that work well on 2.6.x we should not support older
Some features that are planned for Etch such as SE Linux require a 2.6.x
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page