On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 08:33:22PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > > Josh Boyer wrote: > > > Indeed. However, I believe Linus pointed out that even before > > 8b3d1cda4f5f the macros that were removed weren't actually used. > > It's likely safe to go back further than just 3.4. > > > > I'll verify again in the morning and include the furthest back we could > > remove these. For now, let's go with what you suggest to be safe. > > I may be in the minority in having this view or missing a subtlety, > but shouldn't the question be the furthest back we need to remove > these rather than the furthest back we could?
That should be the question, yes. The answer is: However far back people wish to use older stable kernel-headers to build applications against newer glibc. It isn't a clear answer. Some people stick with older kernels while they update their userspace. I was thinking along the lines of the 3.0 kernel being the oldest I'd check for but if people think we shouldn't bother than that's fine by me. josh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
