On Fri, Jul 07, 2000 at 10:50:40AM -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote: > Uh, mine's been stable for quite some time. Your attitude seems to have been > influenced by Apple's practice of planned obsolescence- no reason to support > perfectly good oldworlds when we can force the masses to buy new ones! Might > as well scrap the whole m68k Debian distro, and its dirs in the kernel source, > right?
not at all, my point is that oldworld powermacs are worthless for anything more important then occasional tinkering to blow time. i don't find a machine that requires dozens of fscking attempts to build a working kernel for suitable for anything important, they are nearly impossible to remotely administer given the 99% chance the damn thing won't boot if you replace a kernel. i don't know about you but i have better things to do then run around to the console of servers to fsck with boot loaders. and if the machine is security critical (has users etc) i better damn well be able to upgrade the kernel *now* and not have to screw with it for days, weeks, monthes to get it working (if ever) my opinion is this: for anything remotely important these machines are nothing but trouble. if all your interested in is a tinkering machine they are fine. so long as you don't mind mandatory macos. if you want a macos free system get something other then a oldworld powermac. an old intel box a sparc will be much better choices for that. > But seriously, old arches are supported better under Linux than others because > folk with old boxes make it so. Anyone have some idea where an eager > oldworld-owning developer might look in the kernel source to write a patch? generally you are correct, however i have found the support of the older variety powermacs (7200 for example) to be abysmal as of late. as for 68K, well my 68K machine is completly unsupported by linux (powerbook 540c) not that it matters anymore it stopped working a few days ago. -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
pgpIKxqEC3Tew.pgp
Description: PGP signature
