| 1 |
At 07:17 PM 10/13/2004 -0400, you wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
>--On Wednesday, October 13, 2004 16:57:27 -0600 "Sancho2k.net Lists" |
| 5 |
><lists@××××××××.net> wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>>I would have expected some forwarning, we use(d) it heavily and I would |
| 8 |
>>have expected it to be a popular kernel for the gentoo-server group. What |
| 9 |
>>happened? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
>I'll second this. I can understand the motivation to streamline the |
| 12 |
>number of 2.4 kernels, and not depending on the pre patch series also |
| 13 |
>sounds good, but a little heads up would have been nice. I'll probably |
| 14 |
>migrate to straight gentoo-sources, but there wasn't even warning of this |
| 15 |
>on the dev list. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
>Andy |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I use gs-sources too. I found this message in the Forums from a developer. |
| 20 |
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=236212 |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
quote |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
gs-sources was maintained by a developer who is currently on leave. |
| 25 |
unfortunately all the patches were combined up into 1 big patch file so |
| 26 |
other people attempting to maintain/fix this were having a nightmare. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
other than security fixes, this kernel hasnt been touched in a long time. |
| 29 |
lots of bugs on bugzilla, and we werent exactly sure of its purpose either |
| 30 |
(hardened-sources is for servers, gentoo-sources is for desktop, whats |
| 31 |
gs-sources for?). so we decided to remove it. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
end quote |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
I agree that a heads up would have been nice. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
--Karl |
Archives