--- Eugene Surovegin <ebs@ebshome.net> wrote��

On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 12:13:17AM -0400, David
Woodhouse wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 26 Jul 2004, [gb2312] Song Sam wrote:

quoted

But 2.4 kernel is still a pet for 8xx,at least. I guess many
embedded Linux development lean to 2.4 kernel for the moment.For
Linux kernel hackers,2.4 kernel was dead but it is alive for most
embedded developers.Right? :-)

I cannot speak for 'most embedded developers.'; only those with
clue.

Sorry,I got you wrong.I was a little too sensitive to
see 2.4 with "dead".Just gave my opinion on 2.4 kernel
on embedded development.

quoted

I would not consider deploying anything new on 2.4 today; it's just
not a viable, maintainable platform in my opinion.

It was really a puzzle for me why 2.4 is NOT a viable,
maintainable platform but it is used more than 2.6.x
in many embedded development.Also why to see 2.4 dying
without leaving the official maintaining work to some
volunteers? Any special reason?

I would not consider deploying anything on 2.6 today. IMHO it's not
mature enough to be used in production environment.

I do agree with the view.I guess it is most embedded
developers's opinion.

Thanks for all attention.

Sam

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/