2.4 versus 2.6 patches

[Eugene Surovegin]

On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 12:13:17AM -0400, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> On Mon, 26 Jul 2004, [gb2312] Song Sam wrote:
> > 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.

I find this statement almost offensive, btw.

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

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

Just my $0.02

Eugene

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