On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 12:30:59PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 10:51:24AM +0100, Julien BLACHE wrote: > > > > You do know that m68k is the only architecture still carrying around > > > 2.*2* kernels in sarge? > > Yes. But there are 2.4 kernels available too, don't forget to mention > > that fact. No 2.6, though, but that's not a problem right now. Might > > become a problem for etch, I agree. > > m68k folks, is there anything in the works for 2.6 ? > > To my knowledge there are even buildds running 2.6 on m68k. > Even more: > I took just another piece of m68k hardware, which Debian bought for the m68k > port, to Roman Zippel on March, 3rd in order to let him write the needed > drivers for that accelerator card. So, there will even be new drivers for > m68k soon that will be made for 2.6 kernel series, I think. > > With the new proposal of de facto dropping m68k support, I'm this -><- close > to recommend to Roman, that he better should invest his time into other > projects, because Debian wouldn't appreciate his work to bring up another > public m68k machine.
Notice that m68k doesn't actively participate in the kernel-team, and package their stuff in their own corner though, which may be the reason for this perceived problem. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
