On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 09:18:00PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > in that thread saying it was ok to drop 2.4 support was from Moritz > Muehlenhoff; but you also got feedback from Stephen Gran and Mark Brown, > saying that a runtime check would be preferable.)
Is there a suitable 2.4 based test system accessible to developers somewhere? > > since upstream is not willing to integrate a runtime check in the short > > term and I cannot support such an intrusive unofficial patch (which, BTW, > > does not exist at all ATM). > Why do you say that it would be intrusive? It looks to me like a simple > change to support building more than one select interface at a time, and > using the best one that works. If such a patch existed, would you consider > applying it? What reasons did upstream give for this decision? I've often found people are much more flexible about this sort of thing when presented with a patch but it sounds like there was a more fundamental objection here. -- "You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
