> On 26 Feb 2015, at 14:08, Chas Williams (CONTRACTOR) <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> In message <[email protected]>,Benjamin 
> Kaduk writes:
>> In particular, the threading library used by Linux 2.4, LinuxThreads, is
> 
> Not completely accurate -- there are some 2.6 kernel based distributions
> with LinxuxThreads (although they hopefully provide NPTL as well).
> 
>> When discussion on http://gerrit.openafs.org/#change,6947 began in 2012,
>> it was claimed that dropping support for Linux 2.4 was premature at that
>> time.  It is now nearly three years later, and no progress has been made
>> on that change in gerrit, because of the difficulty of dealing with
>> LinuxThreads and Linux 2.4.
> 
> RHEL4 is the last RHEL distribution to use LinuxThreads by default (at
> least to the best of my knowledge that is the case).

To the best of my knowledge: RHEL3 introduced NPTL, as the default. RHEL4 was 
the last RHEL offering LinuxThreads compatibility.

>  RHEL4 went out of
> production in 2012 and extended support is available until 2017.
> 
> SLES9 was the last SuSE to have LinuxThreads and went out of general
> support in 2011.  I can't find any information on extended support.
> 
> So in 2012 it was a bit premature to consider ending support given the
> upgrade cycle for some organizations.  At this point you should have
> moved on though.
> 
>> As such, I propose that OpenAFS drop support for Linux 2.4 (and thus
>> LinuxThreads) starting with the forthcoming 1.8 release.  Because this is
>> a substantial change, I invite comments from the community as to whether
>> it is appropriate and acceptable to desupport Linux 2.4, and what the
>> scope of the impact of such a change would be.
> 
> Since 1.6 will still be an alternative I don't see any issues.  I guess
> the big question is how long will 1.6 get security/bug fixes with 1.8
> released?

Good question. It will of course depend on available (human) resources, and my 
perception is that the current gradient isn't good. Ideally, I'd personally 
like to see 1.6 receiving security & critical bug fixes until the 
(non-extended) end of life of the enterprise linux distros current at the time 
of the 1.8.0 release. A reasonable minimum IMO is about one year after 1.8 is 
considered at least as mature and stable as 1.6. But in the end, it's the 
gatekeepers' decision.

And: I wonder how many such old systems are actually updated at all.

_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info

Reply via email to