Jeremy Katz wrote:
I don't think a kernel or libc should be "interesting" and the only
reason to change them should be to get one that works with new hardware.
Server apps also tend to be mostly feature-complete even in old
versions. However desktop apps are evolving rapidly and there really is
a missing spot in fedora/rhel style distributions since nothing provides
both kernel/core library stability and current application versions.
Unfortunately as the desktop grows increasingly full-featured, the
amount of the stack which needs to change for supporting newer desktop
apps is increasing.
Are you saying these desktops can't ever run on *bsd/solaris, etc.
kernels and libc's because they need features unique to this month's linux?
Once upon a time (... in a galaxy far, far away) I used to build updated
GNOME versions for older Red Hat Linux releases. It wasn't easy, but it
was pretty constrained to a small set of packages. These days, I'd end
up needing new hal which brings in ConsoleKit which ...[1]
Jeremy
[1] Note: this is an example. I am not saying this is bad. Hi
davidz! :)
I'd say anything at the application level that isn't portable across
platforms is bad, let alone across kernel versions.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
