From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32715 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2004 01:33:19 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 24 Aug 2004 01:33:19 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BzQBa-0000Vw-SD for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 01:33:18 +0000 Received: (qmail 8641 invoked by uid 89); 24 Aug 2004 01:33:18 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 9253 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2004 01:33:18 +0000 Message-ID: <412A9AFD.2030609@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:33:49 -0400 From: Travis Tilley User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (X11/20040811) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [gentoo-dev] development-sources are not 'development' X-Archives-Salt: d5afcb5b-5bf3-42e0-83ca-afb64b72916d X-Archives-Hash: cb5d2be4a1551613a839fd19145dd024 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? Travis Tilley -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list