[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >The same feeling applies, to a lesser degree, with 2.4. It would be one >thing if we were already going to be keeping 2.4 around for other users, or >if the m68k porters put us over critical mass for being able to support 2.4 >for the good of all; but so far, everyone else I've talked to has concluded >that their efforts were better spent porting drivers and whatnot to 2.6 than >to try to support 2.4. Agreed, removing 2.4 support from d-i will allow reducing its complexity, and less complexity means less bugs.
-- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
