Re: [gentoo-dev] development-sources are not 'development'

[Cory Visi <merlin@gentoo.org>]

On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 09:33:49PM -0400, Travis Tilley wrote:
> if we must keep the 2.6 kernels seperate, i suggest that we at least 
> change the name of the package. it's incredibly confusing to have your 
> stable kernel named 'development-sources' or 'gentoo-dev-sources', and 
> there are archs like amd64 that just dont support 2.4 in any way. plus 
> with the new change in kernel development, mm-sources has become the 
> official development tree.
> 
> does anyone object to renaming development-sources to linux26-sources? 
> perhaps a similar name change for gentoo-dev-sources and 
> hardened-dev-sources?

I object to version numbers in the package name. I wasn't around for 
linux26-headers, so I won't dig up that discussion, but I object to this.

Thanks,
Cory

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list