Message142459
| Author | r.david.murray |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Arfrever, Ramchandra Apte, amaury.forgeotdarc, barry, djc, dmalcolm, doko, eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, foom, gagern, jwilk, lemburg, loewis, petri.lehtinen, pitrou, python-dev, r.david.murray, rosslagerwall, sandro.tosi, vstinner |
| Date | 2011-08-19.14:26:14 |
| SpamBayes Score | 2.4702058e-06 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1313763975.65.0.0393608400438.issue12326@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
MAL wrote: > As already mentioned, the diff between Linux 2.x and 3.x will > grow over time and while there may not be much to see now, > things will change in the coming years. The only way I can read this argument that makes any sense to me is that you are arguing for a precise build-time OS string. If it is supposed to be an argument in favor of keeping 'linux3' it makes no sense, since '2' vs '3' is in no way a useful line of demarcation when it comes to linux. So, if you think there is a *run time* need to know the precise *build time* OS version number, can you point to any specific use cases? |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2011-08-19 14:26:15 | r.david.murray | set | recipients: + r.david.murray, lemburg, loewis, barry, doko, amaury.forgeotdarc, gagern, foom, pitrou, vstinner, jwilk, djc, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, Arfrever, dmalcolm, sandro.tosi, rosslagerwall, python-dev, petri.lehtinen, Ramchandra Apte |
| 2011-08-19 14:26:15 | r.david.murray | set | messageid: <1313763975.65.0.0393608400438.issue12326@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2011-08-19 14:26:15 | r.david.murray | link | issue12326 messages |
| 2011-08-19 14:26:14 | r.david.murray | create | |