* Joerg Roedel <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 05:32:15PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > I dont know how you can find the situation of Alpha comparable, which is a
> > legacy architecture for which no new CPU was manufactored in the past ~10
> > years.
> >
> > The negative effects of physical obscolescence cannot be overcome even by
> > the
> > very best of development models ...
>
> The maintainers of that architecture could at least continue to maintain it.
> But that is not the case. Most newer syscalls are not available and overall
> stability on alpha sucks (kernel crashed when I tried to start Xorg for
> example) but nobody cares about it. Hardware is still around and there are
> still some users of it.
You are arguing why maintainers do not act as you suggest, against the huge
negative effects of physical obscolescence?
Please use common sense: they dont act because ... there are huge negative
effects due to physical obscolescence?
No amount of development model engineering can offset that negative.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
