> > number of builds on 2.2 kernels. If our macs cannot run 2.6, we will
> > need to find replacement for these somehow. We do not have the surplus
> > buildd power to just forget about the 2.2-running machines and
> > continue with those machines that do run 2.6.
>
> glibc might force us soon to drop 2.2/2.4 support, I don't think we're
> going to survive much longer without tls support. I'm looking into adding
> the support for it, but as a consequence we might have a complete ABI
> change ahead of us, which we could use to make the m68k a little faster
> (e.g. register arguments, better alignment) and not slower.
How soon? We'll need a little advance warning here. Getting Mac and Atari
support for 2.6 into shape won't happen overnight. I'm not even sure all
Amiga varieties can run 2.6 (crest doesn't).
Michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
