Comment 10 for bug 921078

Adam Conrad (adconrad) wrote :

Also, Steve's comment above that "The precise eglibc on amd64 and armel has 2.6.24 as a minimum kernel version" is demonstrably false. MIN_KERNEL_SUPPORTED in precise on arm* is still set to 2.6.31. In light of that, my above chroot-refreshing dance won't help Nick at all.

Other than "newer is better", has anyone actually made a cogent argument for why we want our non-x86 ports to have a higher MIN_KERNEL_SUPPORTED than amd64 and i386 do?