Re: 2.4 & 2.6 kernels, should sarge be 2.6 only at least for powerpc ?
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 12:32:43PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 10:51:22AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Well, nobody seemed to care or comment on this, so let's take this to a
> > wider audience.
> >
> > Christoph has recently told me that he doesn't care about 2.4, and even
> > benh has mentioned to me that 2.4 support for powerpc will be going away
> > in the near term (well, not the eact words, but you get my meaning). And
> > i guess that Jens also is only interested on 2.6 kernels, even though he
> > is comaintainer of the 2.4 kernels too.
> >
> > So, i am seriously considering dropping all 2.4 powerpc kernels, and
> > going with 2.6 only, and would like to get feedback both from
> > debian-kernel as well as debian-powerpc, feedback i didn't get in the
> > past.
>
> While generally I think defaulting to 2.6 would be a good idea, I'd
> really prefer not to drop 2.4 (as in remove the packages) just yet. It's
This was not my intention, altough a little chat with Branden on irc
made me doubt it. Anyway, i am preparing 2.4.26 packages right now, as
there seems to be a urgent need of it :/ I am somehow doubtfull about
the wisdom of continuing following the 2.4 -benh tree, as not much
effort goes into it, and benh main interest is with 2.6.
> worth noting that no release candidate version of d-i has yet had
> working support for 2.6 on powerpc (test candidate 1 would have done but
> ran into a busybox-cvs bug, so it's likely that neither TC2 nor RC1 will
> have either), although daily builds have had it for some time and in my
> experience work well.
Huh ? how come daily builds have support while TC2 has not ? And as you
know, i am actively working on getting the support for it right.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: