compile error (undefined reference to jffs2_getlink) forkernel 2.4.26

Thomas Gleixner tglx at
Thu Mar 3 12:06:09 EST 2005

On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 09:36 -0600, Steve Wahl wrote:
> In other words, the whole text about "ancient kernels" can easily be
> interpreted to mean anything *before 2.4.26*, and that 2.4.26 and on
> is still fair game to ask the mailing list at the moment.  

You're right.

> It also says that in the *future*, 2.4 will be completely put into
> maintenance mode.  If that future is now, IMHO somebody should update
> that web page to say so.

Will happen.

> [Personally, I don't think you should move to that future just yet;
> 2-6 more months would be where I would do it.  Where I work, there was
> some resistance to moving to 2.6 because it isn't yet "mature" in the
> embedded space, as in the major embedded suppliers like MontaVista
> aren't really shipping 2.6 yet.

In my opinion we should have removed it since long. It's lying around,
makes the tree ugly, breaks on a regular base and nobody cares to fix
it. The active MTD developers are doing 2.6 only and are blamed on a
regular base, why it does not work on 2.4.

If somebody stands up and takes the responsibility to keep the 2.4 stuff
alive, I could be convinced to keep it alive.

Anybody up to it?


More information about the linux-mtd mailing list