On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 12:17:26PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > It's only less effort "all around" because you wouldn't have to do any > of it. Don't you think that someone would have fixed this > well-documented limitation in the last eight or so years if there was a > practical fix? There isn't. > > These options work: > - Drop kernel 2.2 support. I wouldn't mind doing this, but there > may be some opposition; we still get 2.2.x kernel users > periodically. When glibc is built to assume 2.4 kernels it can > handle alternate stacks.
I think dropping support for 2.2 kernel on x86 is fine. The only 2.2 kernel-images still in unstable are for m68k. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
