Hacker News Reader

> The use case is running an old set of tools to build programs for the Atari Jaguar.

This seems really weird as an a.out removal opposition. If you're already using ancient tools to compile programs for ancient hardware, why do you need the latest kernel for it? Why not keep a VM with a system dedicated for that task which you'll never need to update or change in any way?

There's likely a single digit number of people who actually have that use case, right?

View on HN

Because new kernels are better than old kernels.

I think the question of my GP is: Aren't better new kernels better for most people than slightly worse new kernels that are better for only very, very few people? :)

If your point is that a.out support makes kernels worse for everyone else, you can simply compile it out and it will not affect you.

The issue is keeping the code in tree. Its inclusion doesn’t affect the quality of the kernel, its just a maintenance burden.

In what way specifically are they better for the use case of compiling Atari Jaguar software using decades old toolchain?

If I want to run these binaries on my daily driver, it’s much easier if I don’t have to start up a VM. I want the latest Linux kernel on my daily driver for hopefully self-evident reasons.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com