Linux 2.4.x

[Matt Zimmerman]

(NOTE: this is an ubuntu-devel discussion, please follow up only to
ubuntu-devel, and not ubuntu-users)

On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 11:07:33AM +0200, Stefan Kluth wrote:

> On Wed, 6 Oct 2004, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > You can get 2.4.x kernel sources from the "universe" component.
> 
> ahem, and how?  I tried

apt-cache search linux 2.4

> BTW, what about precompiled 2.4 kernels in universe, simply using the
> configs from debian?

You can use them if you like, with the same disclaimer of support.

> I think it will stay around for quite a while, at least as long important
> add-ons like openafs only work reliably with a 2.4 kernel (I wish this
> wasn't so).  For large installations in heterogenous environments like
> universities and labs (open)afs is a popular solution to provide universal
> file access.  Ubuntu doesn't support this at all at the moment and will
> therefore be unable to penetrate this market.  You are probably aware that
> exactly these (universities/labs) are early adaptors of new technology.

We make this possible for those who must have it, but cannot commit to
long-term support of Linux 2.4.  OpenAFS is one of rather a few exceptions,
with nearly all major kernel extensions either supporting 2.6, or even
integrated into mainline in 2.6.  If OpenAFS is not moving to 2.6, it risks
being left behind as the community moves on.

> After booting into the 2.4 kernel there where only two minor issues:

Focusing on modern kernels has allowed us to simplify system configuration
and provide useful functionality, which won't be available if you downgrade
to 2.4.x.

> Would it make sense to propose working 2.4 kernels as part of ubuntu main
> for future releases?  IMHO this is a requirement for any serious distro,
> which claims to also support server and large installations.  Should an
> entry to the wiki/faq be made?

At the beginning of the release cycle when the package list was being worked
out, we discussed this, and indeed a 2.4 kernel was on the supported list
for a while.  The following concerns prompted its removal (there may have
been more, but this is what I remember):

- The clear viability and community momentum of Linux 2.6 as the
  current-generation desktop and server platform

- The relative lack of community support for previous-generation kernels, as
  was most painfully felt with Linux 2.2 in Debian woody

- The simplicity of development afforded by supporting a single kernel tree
  for the entire distribution

-- 
 - mdz