Re: Linux 2.6 and LiS 2.18 vs 2.16.18

My humble opinion about this is that it would be easier to port your
driver to LiS 2.18.0 (and linux 2.6) than to port LiS 2.16.18 to
Linux 2.6.  I have never looked at the LiS timod/xnet library, but I
would wager that it hasn't changed much between those two releases. 
I'm sure Brian has an opinion about this and since you're using his
distro, you should probably take his advice....

We at Adax have successfully ported all of our products to linux 2.6
32 and 64 bits using LiS 2.18.0.   We have not yet decided when or if
we will publish these changes publicly, but I have given pretty
detailed instrustructions on this list about what we had to do to get
all of the current 2.6 32 and 64 bit distros up and running with LiS
2.18.0.  We (Adax) do not support linux 2.6 with any previous
versions of LiS.


thanks-
dan

--- Christian Hildner <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi there,
> 
> though listening to this list it seems unclear to me which way to
> go 
> when migrating from Linux 2.4 to 2.6. We use the inet driver and
> the 
> timod/xnet library currently from 2.16.18 (openss7). Now I'd like
> to 
> start a discussion about the future way (2.6 kernel). The
> alternatives 
> are first using 2.18 + ported inet + timod  or second porting
> 2.16.18 to 
> support the 2.6 kernel. However there are questions left:
> 
> Are there people supporting/maintaining 2.18 in the future?
> Is it viable to have both 2.4 and 2.6 support in the 2.16.18
> sources at 
> the same time?
> How easy can drivers/modules be ported from 2.16.18 to 2.18?
> 
> I'd like to hear your opinion. Hopefully there is a lot of
> response, 
> maybe even a big discussion on that topic.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Christian
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-streams mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://gsyc.escet.urjc.es/mailman/listinfo/linux-streams
> 
> 
>