From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751505AbWB1HYf (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2006 02:24:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751911AbWB1HYf (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2006 02:24:35 -0500 Received: from mail.acc.umu.se ([130.239.18.156]:47342 "EHLO mail.acc.umu.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751505AbWB1HYe (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2006 02:24:34 -0500 Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 08:24:31 +0100 From: David Weinehall To: Joerg Schilling , twalberg@mindspring.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [OT] portable Makefiles (was: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest)) Message-ID: <20060228072431.GR20494@vasa.acc.umu.se> Mail-Followup-To: Joerg Schilling , twalberg@mindspring.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <43FC68C1.nailEC711MJAV@burner> <20060223081257.GA28833@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <43FDD944.nailFUE21NE9H@burner> <20060223160238.GA31520@mindspring.com> <43FDE983.nailFWR613JK4@burner> <20060223172346.GB31520@mindspring.com> <43FDF193.nailG0L117NIN@burner> <20060223175317.GD31520@mindspring.com> <43FEDB63.nailGCX2HX66G@burner> <20060225174410.GN20494@vasa.acc.umu.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060225174410.GN20494@vasa.acc.umu.se> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Editor: Vi Improved X-Accept-Language: Swedish, English X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7ACE 0FB0 7A74 F994 9B36 E1D1 D14E 8526 DC47 CA16 X-GPG-Key: http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/files/pub_dc47ca16.gpg.asc Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 06:44:10PM +0100, David Weinehall wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 11:09:39AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Tim Walberg wrote: > > > > > >> > 'accepted "bugs" not being fixed' is not equivalent to 'package is > > > >> > not being maintained'... at least not in my admittedly meager grasp > > > >> > of logic... > > > >> > > > >> They told me that fixing would take "a while". If you believe that > > > >> "a while" is 20 years, then you seem to live in a different universe then I do. > > > >> > > > > > > Indeed... I had already concluded that. It now seems that in > > > your universe, the time span between 1999 and 2006 is on > > > the order of 20 years, which seems to be a factor of nearly > > > 3 over what it is in my universe (either that, or it's not > > > 2006 where you are, but rather 2019...). > > > > I don't know in which universe you live, but in my universe software > > that does not fix severe bugs after 7 years or does not publish a new > > version at least every 2-3 years is called deas and unmaintained. Both > > applies to GNU make. > > Uhm, the version of GNU make in Debian (3.81beta4) was released > 12 December 2005; I wouldn't call that dead (or unmaintained). Oh, and as an update, 3.81rc1 was release on the 19th of February 2006. Yeah, very unmaintained and dead upstream... Regards: David -- /) David Weinehall /) Northern lights wander (\ // Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel // Dance across the winter sky // \) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Full colour fire (/