Re: [kbuild-devel] Re: CML2 design philosophy heads-up

Jes Sorensen
2001-05-21T09:59:53Z

>>>>> "Jakob" == Jakob Østergaard <jakob@unthought.net> writes:

Jakob> On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 10:10:49PM -0400, Robert M. Love wrote:
>> I think this is a very important point, and one I agree with. I
>> tend to let my distribution handle stuff like python. now, I use
>> RedHat's on-going devel, RawHide. it is not using python2. in
>> fact, since switching to python2 may break old stuff, I don't
>> expect python2 until 8.0. that wont be for 9 months. 90% of
>> RedHat's configuration tools, et al, are written in python1 and
>> they just are not going to change on someone's whim.

Jakob> 2.6.0 isn't going to happen for at least a year or two. What's
Jakob> the problem ?

Jakob> Want 2.5.X ? Get the tools too.

Some people grab the latest devel kernels because thats all that works
on their hardware.

Jakob> I'm in no position to push people around, but I think the
Jakob> whining about CML2 tool requirements is completely unjustified.
Jakob> If we required that everything worked with GCC 2.7.2 and nmake,
Jakob> where would we be today ? I'm a lot more worried about CML2
Jakob> itself than about the tools it requires :)

gcc-2.7.2 is broken it miscompiles the kernel, Python1 or bash are
not.

Jakob> Whether CML2 requires python2 or not, the distributions will
Jakob> change. This is not about Eric pushing something down people's
Jakob> throats. Tools evolve, and new revisions introduce
Jakob> incompatibilities, but distributions still follow the
Jakob> evolution. Nobody ships perl4 today either.

The point is that Eric has been trying to push distributions to ship
P2.

Jes