On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 10:15:10 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Colin Watson) wrote: > Edward Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Edward Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >Another thought, bridge contains the userspace tools for operating an > >> >ethernet bridge on Linux 2.0, we have have not supported the 1.x > >> >versions of the Linux kernel for some time, is it about time that we > >> >dropped the support for version 2.0? > >> > >> Hmm, the modutils in woody doesn't support 2.0. Should we remove bridge, > >> then? No-one seems to have been interested in adopting it for quite some > >> time. > > > >In that case I suggest that we remove bridge, and make it official that the > >next release of Debian will only versions of Linux supported are 2.2 and 2.4. > > > >Are there any other packages that only support Linux 2.0? > > At least the following binary packages: > > arla-modules-2.0.36 > ftape-tools (?) > ibcs-source-2.0 > ipautofw (?) > ipfwadm (will this work with 2.4's compatibility mode? If so keep it) > kernel-doc-2.0.36 > kernel-headers-2.0.36 > kernel-patch-2.0.36-m68k > kernel-patch-2.0.37-raid > kernel-source-2.0.36 > > This should definitely be discussed on debian-devel, though (cc'ed).
If the general sentiment is what I think it is, then I agree: LAY IT TO REST ALREADY. Linux 2.0 and 2.2 are both obsolete. There's very, very little sense in keeping either around. I can imagine some people screaming bloody murder if support for 2.2 was removed, but 2.0 has _got_ to go. And that would pretty well get rid of all those crufty packages and reduce the archive size. Which is always a good thing. Usually. This is, however, my _personal_opinion_ and there will probably be very good reasons against it. Let the debate begin! Regards, Alex.
