On Aug 2, 2011 6:53 PM, "C Anthony Risinger" <anthony@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Tom Gundersen <teg@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 6:38 PM, C Anthony Risinger <anthony@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> ... out of curiosity, if the original reason for having a `kernel26` > >> package was to also have a `kernel24` (from what i read -- wasn't > >> around then) how is this handled with the `linux` package? or is this > >> a non-issue? > > > > We no longer support linux 2.4... How would this be an issue? > > sorry i wasn't clear -- i meant when the time comes that dual support > would be desirable, eg. linux 4.7 or whatever :-) > > C Anthony Why would you do that for the kernel, but not for other packages? -- vic@xxxxxxxxxxx :: http://vic.demuzere.be :: PGP: 0x6690CF94 My software never contains bugs, it just develops random features. Sent from my phone, please excuse my brevity.
