Re: glibc-2.3.90-26 and older kernels

[Yuri Prushinsky <prushinsky gmail com>]

David, Fedora have different ideology than Gentoo or others, it's normal 
to require a version "not lower than" from the user if there's no other 
way to step ahead, it just should be specified in the release notes. 
Gnome vs KDE flame will burn only if the one will be removed from the 
core (something similar to what Patrick did with Slackware, I guess..)

David Hollis wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 11:11 +0900, Naoki wrote:
>
> > FC3 shipped with 2.6.9-1.667 by the way. So unless you're still booting
> > with an FC2 kernel I can't see this change biting anybody.
> >
> > On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 16:42 -0800, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> >
> > > Josh Boyer wrote:
> > >
> > > > Out of curiosity... why does it require 2.6.9 and higher?
> > >
> > > To get rid of all the compatibility crap for kernels < 2.6.9.
>
> It'll hit somebody who feels the need to keep that old 2.0.30 kernel
> running or something.... And it'll start a big flamewar about how RedHat
> keeps hosing people over because they are slaves to the almighty dollar
> and don't care about the FOSS community.  It'll then melt into a Gnome
> vs KDE debate and various folks will chime in with "thats why I run
> Gentoo now!"...
>
> Out of curiosity though, how much compatibility cruft has built up over
> all this time?  Is it a size issue?  Maintenance?  Performance even?

--
Sincerely yours,
 Yura