| 1 |
On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 09:33:49PM -0400, Travis Tilley wrote: |
| 2 |
> if we must keep the 2.6 kernels seperate, i suggest that we at least |
| 3 |
> change the name of the package. it's incredibly confusing to have your |
| 4 |
> stable kernel named 'development-sources' or 'gentoo-dev-sources', and |
| 5 |
> there are archs like amd64 that just dont support 2.4 in any way. plus |
| 6 |
> with the new change in kernel development, mm-sources has become the |
| 7 |
> official development tree. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> does anyone object to renaming development-sources to linux26-sources? |
| 10 |
> perhaps a similar name change for gentoo-dev-sources and |
| 11 |
> hardened-dev-sources? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I object to version numbers in the package name. I wasn't around for |
| 14 |
linux26-headers, so I won't dig up that discussion, but I object to this. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Thanks, |
| 17 |
Cory |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives