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 |