Turbo Fredriksson dijo [Wed, May 23, 2007 at 12:07:01AM +0200]: > Frans> Debian cannot afford to have a broken kernel for a release > Frans> subarch for that period of time. Kernel development moves > Frans> too fast for that. > > Do we really NEED (read: _require_) the 'latest and greatest' (or whatever > kernel is 'latest and greatest' at freeze (or whenever the release team > decides to choose which kernel to release with)!?!?!?
Umh... As the kernel development/release scheme has changed from long-lived stable releases to small, incremental releases with both bugfixes and main development, yes, I think we require the latest and greatest kernel available at any given moment for our releases - Important features are added at every release, and we _do_ need our users to be able to install on the current systems at release time. Besides, the kernel team spent quite a lot of effort into integrating the kernel in such a way we don't have to support as many different kernel flavors/versions as we did in the past. This is automatically translated into stabler and more predictable kernel package updates in unstable/testing. > Also have a bunch of SPARC32's running, and I'd like to continue to run > Debian GNU/Linux on it (read: a reasonable late release - I don't want to > keep running sarge "for the remainder of it's life" - I have no time or > resources to keep compiling the whole dist myself). ...Do you have the technical skills to step up and become a sparc32 porter? If so, you can keep the subarch alive. I also hate to see Debian losing support for a whole and once very popular class of hardware, but the fact is... With nobody doing this work, there is not much way to keep it alive. -- Gunnar Wolf - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244 PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23 Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
