From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 00:13:17 -0400 (EDT) From: David Woodhouse To: =?gb2312?q?Song=20Sam?= Cc: "Robert P. J. Day" , Embedded Linux PPC list Subject: Re: 2.4 versus 2.6 patches In-Reply-To: <20040726025057.68338.qmail@web15204.mail.bjs.yahoo.com> Message-ID: References: <20040726025057.68338.qmail@web15204.mail.bjs.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Mon, 26 Jul 2004, [gb2312] Song Sam wrote: > But 2.4 kernel is still a pet for 8xx,at least.I guess > many embedded Linux development lean to 2.4 kernel for > the moment.For Linux kernel hackers,2.4 kernel was > dead but it is alive for most embedded > developers.Right? :-) I cannot speak for 'most embedded developers.'; only those with clue. I would not consider deploying anything new on 2.4 today; it's just not a viable, maintainable platform in my opinion. -- dwmw2 ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/