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

Re: removing /etc/hotplug.d/ support

On Aug 25, Horms <horms@debian.org> wrote:

> There are some architectures where 2.4 is required, its
> because of these that it seems that we are stuck with 2.4 for Etch.
>   alpha (installer), m68k (2.6 only works on amiga), s390 (installer),
>   mips, mipsel
What does "installer" mean? IIRC SuSE supports s390 with 2.6 kernels.
Also, exactly how is 2.6 broken for mips and mipsel? From a quick google
search it looks like it's actively developed and even commercially

> There are some architectures, like i386, which are pretty well
> maintained upstream for 2.4, so it seems reasonable to keep them,
It's not important how they are maintained now, but how they will be in
two years.

> as we need 2.4 because of the first group, and its not a whole lot of
> extra effort - if it is lets get rid of them. I'm aware of the udev
> issue, I'm happy for that to be a catalyst for canning 2.4 where
> possible. But what about the arches that need 2.4. Does that mean
> we have to backport udev anyway?
Not plausible, it depends on sysfs and the drivers core.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: