From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from systemhalted (CPE0080c82c70ca.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [24.112.224.149]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 491AA4856 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 08:40:03 -0700 (MST) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:39:49 -0500 From: Carlos O'Donell To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: debian-hppa@lists.debian.org, parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org, debian-glibc@lists.debian.org, John David Anglin , Randolph Chung Message-ID: <20021205153949.GB27054@systemhalted> References: <20021205010845.GU16331@systemhalted> <20021205133139.C5327@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20021205133139.C5327@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> Subject: [parisc-linux] Re: GNU/Libc 2.3.1 on HP-PARISC requires >= 2.4.19 kernel. Sender: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org Errors-To: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: > > Why? > > ==== > > - More testing. > > - Bugs fixed in unaligned handlers. > > - Trap handler fixes. > > - More things than you can shake a stick at, and all thanks to the > > wonderful kernel hacking team that parisc-linux has. > > That's great, but there are still problems with 2.4.19 and 2.4.20. I think > you're doing our users a disservice by requiring them to upgrade to 2.4.19. > Why not relax the minimum version requirement down to 2.4.17? I agree that it was probably a mistake at the time since 2.4.19 seemed to solve a lot of problems... though in hindsight they are still too unstable to push forward on all of our users. Hrmm... *Carlos mulls for a few hours* I'll relax it to 2.4.17 in debian, but I'll leave the upstream requirement of 2.4.19. c.