zlacker

>>skille+(OP)
It's always promises about the future, and never suddenly adding support for old products.

Do people have any faith in the these sorts of notices, when nothing ever produced by the company has yet been supported that long?

>>nilamo+D9
I suspect that given all the partners involved in these projects, it's likely infeasible to go back to those partners and ask for retroactive extended support from all of them. If any of them (or transitively any of your partners' partners) say no, you are likely screwed.

>>devran+Se
It's no coincidence that companies that make their own chips have longer support cycles.

When a chip is supplied by a vendor and needs to be supported in the kernel, the whole thing can be EoLed by one stubborn vendor. That's one of the promises of Fuchsia - decoupling hardware support from the rest of the system, so you can keep everything else up-to-date even if Qualcomm tells you to kick rocks.

https://fuchsia.dev/fuchsia-src/concepts#updatable