[Fwd: Re: [Th] Upgrade apport - jak rozumieć ten błąd?]

[Jakub Bogusz]

On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 09:03:11PM +0200, Tomasz Mateja wrote:
> Elan Ruusamäe pisze:
> > On Wednesday 09 April 2008 21:25, Tomasz Mateja wrote:
> >>> and instead of living out your feelings, report bugs what is wrong with
> >>> 2.6.22 kernel (in lists or http://bugs.pld-linux.org/). 2.6.16 is at
> >>> least three years old kernel. upstream is near 2.6.25 already. and th/ti
> >>> do have 2.6.22 kernel, do you shout there too?
> >> So what?
> >> Why not upgrade glibc in ac to 2.7? and XFree to xorg - they are also
> >> very old. This is STABLE so minor updates or security updates are
> >> welcome. bugs.pld-... is not the place for this request.
> > 
> > glibc = would break 2.4 kernel compatability (afaik already glibc 2.4 required 
> > 2.6.0 kernel), that has been accidentally already broken several times. 
> > intentionally broking it would be evil.
> > 
> > xorg 7.0 = too much to rebuild with so less gain, and so far there's no binary 
> > incompatibility that i've encountered using X11 (aka xorg 6.9).
> > 
> > and kernel update is needed to let ac live a little longer. as there's need to 
> > support newer hardware. it was considered dead already time it was released. 
> > and some major changes like updating glibc or gcc would mean changing the 
> > distro, i.e dropping some architectures and 2.4 kernel compatability.
> > 
> What are the super-hiper features with new release of kernel??
> Remeber - no xorg - no compiz - no fun - kernel upgrade wont help
> Old glibc - new kernel - compatibility emulated - what new features?

Usability with current hardware. Disk controllers, Ethernet adapters
etc.
Any volunteers to backport those new drivers/driver updates to 2.6.16?


-- 
Jakub Bogusz    http://qboosh.pl/