Re: "obsolete" hardware

yuri mironoff (
Wed, 11 Jun 1997 16:32:00 -0400 (EDT)

On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Edward S. Marshall wrote:

> Are you the one doing development? If a maintainer chooses to maintain
> backwards compatibility, are you in a position to stop them? No. This is
> the beauty of collaborative, free development; noone dictates to Solar
> Designer how he designs his non-executable stack patch, noone dictated to
> Alan and Co. when they were redesigning the networking code for 2.0.

Yes I'm doing development for Linux - and no our software can't
possibly run on 386 and provide all the features we're building into it.

> Just because you are a bleeding-edge bigot, do not force it on the rest of
> us who choose not to upgrade every time Intel decides to release a new
> chip.

There is software out there thats NOT networking related and I dont
need to be a biggot to want it to finish running before I'm dead and

> > Let me also put it in a financial perspective. Our company is
> > developing a distributed IDE. It so happens that Linux is the target
> > platform. I would hate to explain to my boss that the bright side of
> > the situation is that "Linux works on a 386".
> Ah, threats. Welcome to Linux. You know, a *free development cycle*, with
> people working on this because they love it, not because they're
> necessarily making money doing it. We have, because of this, one of the
> most finely crafted UNIX variants in existance. (Whoa, I'm starting to
> sound like someone on comp.os.linux.advocacy...)

This is not a threat - I'm telling you that we are trying to further
Linux by developing for it. The reason is simple: we love the operating
system and think it deserves to have the best software. What we DONT think
is that Linux should be condemned to routing duty only. Wake up and smell
the software.