Re: SMP install (was Re: new debian-cd scripts)
On Thu, May 14, 1998 at 11:16:38AM -0400, Anderson MacKay unlurked and wrote:
[watch your attribution] :)
>I said:
> > I'll gladly package a SMP 2.0.33 kernel-image if there is no objection.
>
> <unlurk> :-)
> More crosstalk from linux-smp: One comment would be that, in addition to a
> 2.0.33 SMP kernel, it would be great to have one of the new
> 2.1.101+mtrr+IOAPIC kernels. Comparatively, they scream and tend to be
> more stable on some systems.
> </unlurk>
Well, there was a discussion about a 2.1.X specific package (autofs?)a while
back. I don't know how well a 2.1.101 kernel would be received by the peoples
that weren't in agreement with the presence of the autofs package.
Would you ship a 2.1.101 in stable? That's the question. I would if there is
sufficient warning in the description and during the setup but this is
because i think that the more eyes we get on it, the more bugs that will be
found. Was it Linus or Eric S. Raymond that said: "Given enough eyeballs, all
bugs are shallow"?
Regards,
--
Eric Leblanc -- jughead@generation.net -- Be happy use GNU/Linux
As for the M$ pundits claim that the problems result from an
incorrect setup/configuration: they are perfectly correct, if you
hadn't installed an M$ OS, then the crashes wouldn't be happening.
-- Jeff Dutky on c.o.l.a
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: