linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Peddemors <michael@linuxmagic.com>
To: Claudio Martins <ctpm@vega.net.dhis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: obsolete code must die
Date: 14 Jun 2001 20:48:44 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <992576924.4885.13.camel@mistress> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <01061402132900.00856@vega>
In-Reply-To: <01a401c0f46b$20b932e0$480e6c42@almlba4sy7xn6x>  <01061402132900.00856@vega>

This seems to be drifting into that old argument(s) of a forked kernel..
And of course here I am adding to the flotsams..and threadsomes

2.5 for Pentium Plus generation.

<2.4 For older hardware..

Ducking the inevitable flames, I think for the most part, there might be
justification for some forking.. (read obsolesence)

Anyone with a <486 probably shudders at the space and time requirements
of compiling modern kernels.. All they need is the older kernels.. 
The older boxes don't support the new hardware anyways..
But then there is always someone who will find a way to marry a new PCI
or USB bus to an older CPU, and it is nice that 'one kernel to bind
them' philosophy of linux..

But in this age of 'disposability' more and more people just accept they
have to buy new hardware every 3-5 years.. For those that want to
maintain Linux on that, so be it..

Maybe we need more Alan Cox's, and then we could have sperate kernel
trees, Linus's which is the mmmmmother.. (HI MOM!) and the pre-pentium
tree, the post-pentium tree, the embedded tree etc..

But in reality, with all the people contributing now to one tree, there
is still more work to be done.. Who wants to split those resources?

But it is a legitimate argument...

In reality, hardware needs drive kernel upgrades.. and of course some
security issues.. Those who have older hardware aren't interested in
upgrading the kernel, why should they.. it is rock solid as it is..
And newer machines don't need support for the older hardware..

If you want to stay bleading edge kernel wise, usually you stay bleeding
edge hardware wise.. But it is nice the we now can apply the power of
iptables to older 486 firewalls..

BUT as much as it might be cleaner, and a little less headaches to drop
all the fluff that doesn't usually get used, is it worth dropping it
when all newer hardware doesn't care about a little bloat.. *cough* I
can't believe I just supported bloat..  Okay, me personally, I wouldn't
mind seeing tiny litle kernels and tiny little code trees, makes me feel
more effecient, and I don't get blurry eyes from grepping so much code..

(Personally sometimes I think all this new power is wasted in PC's is
wasted, but I have to admit.. these 10 second compiles vs the old 28
hour ones are nice)

On 14 Jun 2001 02:13:29 +0100, Claudio Martins wrote:
> On Thursday 14 June 2001 01:44, Daniel wrote:
> 
> > -- If someone really needs support for this junk, they will always have the
> > option of using the 2.0.x, 2.2.x or 2.4.x series.
> >
> 
>   You mean you want 2.5+ series to just stop supporting all older hardware?
-- 
"Catch the Magic of Linux..."
--------------------------------------------------------
Michael Peddemors - Senior Consultant
LinuxAdministration - Internet Services
NetworkServices - Programming - Security
WizardInternet Services http://www.wizard.ca
Linux Support Specialist - http://www.linuxmagic.com
--------------------------------------------------------
(604)589-0037 Beautiful British Columbia, Canada


  parent reply	other threads:[~2001-06-15  3:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <Pine.LNX.4.21.0106140018140.14934-100000@imladris.rielhome .conectiva>
2001-06-14  0:44 ` Daniel
2001-06-14  0:54   ` Rik van Riel
2001-06-14  0:56   ` Jaswinder Singh
2001-06-14  1:00   ` Jeff Garzik
     [not found]   ` <20010613204729.A18297@pimlott.ne.mediaone.net>
2001-06-14  1:05     ` Daniel Dickman
2001-06-14  1:09       ` Rik van Riel
2001-06-14  1:20       ` Gary E. Miller
2001-06-14  1:08   ` Colonel
2001-06-13 22:23     ` Rafael Diniz
2001-06-15 19:45       ` Eric Hancock
2001-06-14 19:00     ` Mike A. Harris
2001-06-14  1:11   ` John Chris Wren
2001-06-14  1:13   ` Claudio Martins
2001-06-14  1:23   ` Justin Guyett
2001-06-14  1:51   ` Mohammad A. Haque
2001-06-14  1:55   ` Horst von Brand
2001-06-14  3:41     ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2001-06-14  1:58   ` D. Stimits
2001-06-14  2:22   ` Alan Olsen
2001-06-14  1:24     ` Robert Love
2001-06-14  1:32       ` Colonel
2001-06-14  1:45         ` Rainer Mager
2001-06-14  2:00           ` Download process for a "split kernel" (was: obsolete code must die) David Luyer
2001-06-14  2:30             ` Jaswinder Singh
2001-06-14  7:56             ` Daniel Phillips
2001-06-14  8:34               ` Alexander Viro
2001-06-14 16:25                 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-06-14 17:21                 ` Richard Gooch
2001-06-14 12:07             ` Horst von Brand
2001-06-14 12:14               ` David Luyer
2001-06-14 12:18                 ` Rob Landley
2001-06-14  7:56           ` obsolete code must die Alan Cox
2001-06-14  9:06             ` Ghozlane Toumi
2001-06-14  9:24             ` James Sutherland
2001-06-14 14:45             ` Michael Bacarella
2001-06-15  3:58             ` Michael Peddemors
2001-06-15  4:09               ` Joel Jaeggli
2001-06-15 11:51             ` Rogier Wolff
2001-06-14  1:41     ` David Luyer
2001-06-14  2:37       ` Tom Vier
2001-06-14  8:35     ` Bohdan Vlasyuk
2001-06-14 10:25     ` Andrzej Krzysztofowicz
2001-06-14  2:31   ` James Stevenson
2001-06-14  3:24   ` Rik van Riel
2001-06-14  3:48   ` Stephen Satchell
2001-06-14  4:26     ` Rik van Riel
2001-06-14  6:31   ` Russell King
2001-06-14  6:54     ` Daniel Dickman
2001-06-14  7:12   ` L. K.
2001-06-14  8:44   ` Luigi Genoni
2001-06-14  9:55   ` Thomas Pornin
2001-06-14 15:15   ` Brad Johnson
2001-06-14 18:57   ` Mike A. Harris
2001-06-15  3:48   ` Michael Peddemors [this message]
2001-06-15 14:21     ` Horst von Brand
2001-06-14 10:22 Heusden, Folkert van
2001-06-14 13:05 ` Nils Holland
2001-06-14 14:01 Jesse Pollard
2001-06-14 17:21 ` richard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=992576924.4885.13.camel@mistress \
    --to=michael@linuxmagic.com \
    --cc=ctpm@vega.net.dhis.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: obsolete code must die' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).