[arch-dev-public] [HEADSUP] Minimum kernel version bump

Jan de Groot jan at jgc.homeip.net
Fri Dec 30 05:19:24 EST 2011

On do, 2011-12-29 at 20:16 +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've realized I didn't say much productive, but I don't have time to
> > fight this battle, nor do I even really use the LTS kernel. However,
> > this whole darn thing just seems troublesome, and I'm a tad surprised
> > we are the only ones unhappy about this, if that is even the case. Is
> > there no push back occurring on these mailing lists?
> There seem to be no interest in making udev work with old kernels, as
> far as I can tell from the ML.

Which is quite logical. We're the only distribution that maintains the
latest userspace with an LTS kernel. Your statement is: "We upgrade
udev, we have to drop old kernels now". All the other distributions:
"Hmm, this udev sucks, we can't use this with our kernel, let's keep it
on hold, just like we do with pkg X".
This is quite logical: why depend on a several years old kernel, but use
the latest and greatest udev? Those things are tied together quite

As for the minimum version:

That commit was done 5 months ago and is in udev since release 173. Did
we ever receive any bugreport about 2.6.32 not working? The readme file
has stated 2.6.34 requirement for a long time now, and still does that.
So maybe there's no problem at all and things still work fine with
2.6.32. As long as our LTS kernel has the options compiled in as
required by udev, I don't think it will become a huge problem. 

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list