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

Re: Default ISA/tuning flags for GCC, --enable-kernel= level for glibc

Michael Cronenworth wrote:
-------- Original Message --------

Can you please not quote full e-mail headers? Aside from feeding spammers, it's a waste of bandwidth.

Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
Can we *please* wait a bit until raising the bar *that* high?  Breaking
mock builds for rawhide on F9/10 releases is a really bad idea IMHO.
Which meas supporting at least 2.6.27.  Maybe in a year when F9 is EOL
and F10 has a 2.6.29 kernel update we can reconsider 2.6.29.

So when 2010 rolls around you'll be saying "pleaseeeee wait until F12 has reached EOL"?

If at that point you're calling for 2.6.34 or whatever is current then, then of course you'll get the same complaining.

I fail to see how supporting live upgrade from an in-support version is unreasonable.

The pain has to occur sometime.

Why? Drop support for not-supported kernels. Currently that seems to mean 'earlier than 2.6.18'. In the future, that will be something higher, and we can bump accordingly. There is a lag built into this system, but that's much different than stagnation.

How about rolling up to 2.6.18 right now? That shouldn't hurt anything, should it?

Unless I missed something, Gerd didn't say anything to indicate a problem with that. I see rather 2.6.27 was mentioned, which is later even than 2.6.18 (although I'd have to agree with Jesse about supporting 2.6.18).

Please do not quote my e-mail address unobfuscated in message bodies.
find / -user your -name base -print0 | xargs -0 chown us:cats -- Unknown

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