Bug#164768: libc: IPv6 still not correct.
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 10:56:45AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> > Half tongue-in-cheek, half not: Is 2.2 a supported kernel for the
> > sarge release? Since the 2.4 series has stabilized, it might be
> > time to put thoughts into just telling people that 2.4 is Good And
> > Right.
> For a lot of architectures, 2.4 was _the_ kernel. I know it was that
> way for all our new architectures, and atleast sparc64 on the old
> architectures.
I also suspect that a person who won't upgrade to 2.4 also wouldn't
want to run sarge when it's released anyway. Who would we ping about
this, aj?
Tks,
Jeff Bailey
--
learning from failures is nice in theory...
but in practice, it sucks :)
- Wolfgang Jaehrling
Reply to: