> From: Ben Hutchings <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Bug#661998: version requirement too specific
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2012 14:13:09 +0000
>
> On Sat, 2012-03-03 at 13:04 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> [...]
>> So why is there such a close version requirement between perf and
>> linux-tools-x.y? Why isn't there a perf_3 binary or just an
>> alternative that works with 3.x kernels in general
>
> perf version x.y may generally depend on new kernel features in x.y.
How does that prevent the existance of a perf_3 binary that requires
only features present in all (most) 3.x kernels? Sure you wouldn't get
all the bleeding edge features but you would get most functionality.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
