AFAIK 6.x has a MAJOR difference in structure.
Swapping target before even arriving at our original destination
sounds like an invitation to a mess beyond description to me.

IMHO we may consider moving on to 6.x, *after* arriving at a stable,
workable, and useful 5.x.
For ex, many of my old colleagues *refuse* to use anything newer than XP
SP2, because of all
the compatibility issues, and they do *not* want that headache in addition
to dealing with their
own application code.

WBR // Love

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Adam <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think it is NT 5.2 though. I cannot work out why not set the target for
> 6.x though as that kernel is more stable than the 5.x version.
>
>
> On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 21:29:58 +1000, Love Nystrom <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>  2011/4/5 Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo <[email protected]>
>>
>>  AFAIK we are targetting 2003 kernel
>>>
>>>
>> But 2003 is still a 5.x kernel, isn't it ?
>> Or am I starting to suffer brain coagulation from recurrent heat stroke ?
>>
>> I'm using 4th Ed as my compass .. and 5th edition address 6.x kernel.
>> If we're really working on a 6.x kernel now, I need to know where
>> we transcended
>> from 5.x so I can archive a private branch of 5.x at it's last known
>> version.
>>
>> WBR // Love
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Love Nystrom <[email protected]
>> >wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>  Hi James,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, most interesting, but isn't it a little beside point?
>>>> I mean, we're still targeting the XP kernel in ReactOS, aren't we?
>>>> Or have I missed a re-targeting point in my absence?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
> --
> Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

Reply via email to