Do we really need the latest kernel on them, though? As in, is it worth it?
In 100 years, if we need to run kernel 6.12 to use a 3c509, is that all that bad? It's not like being "stuck" on an old IRIX without the proprietary dev CD where you have a catch 22 problem.
An old system version that's completely open is whatever the sysadmin version of "turning complete".
Sure, port the open system to the hardware that does not have an open system. But I question the value of keeping it up to date.
All else being equal, sure it'd be cool. But all else is not equal. So yes, ripping out old code is the right move for Linux, in my opinion.
The other open question is, will there still be operational 3c509s 100 years from now?
Another way I put it, with a heavy sigh, is: "There will come a day—and odds are, it's not far off now—when the last working real Amiga will stop working for the last time."
Comments
Do we really need the latest kernel on them, though? As in, is it worth it?
In 100 years, if we need to run kernel 6.12 to use a 3c509, is that all that bad? It's not like being "stuck" on an old IRIX without the proprietary dev CD where you have a catch 22 problem.
An old system version that's completely open is whatever the sysadmin version of "turning complete".
Sure, port the open system to the hardware that does not have an open system. But I question the value of keeping it up to date.
All else being equal, sure it'd be cool. But all else is not equal. So yes, ripping out old code is the right move for Linux, in my opinion.
I'd prefer a 3c905B-TX, because PCI. And because I have written a driver for it, on my own, to reverse engineer it, about 30+ years ago :-)
The other open question is, will there still be operational 3c509s 100 years from now?
Another way I put it, with a heavy sigh, is: "There will come a day—and odds are, it's not far off now—when the last working real Amiga will stop working for the last time."