Using 2.1 kernels.
Now that I got my question answered that I won't kill my debian system by
running 2.1, Is there any advantage to running 2.1 over 2.0 in the real
world. I looked through a "make menu-config", and didn't see anything
new that I could use, except maybe ipv6 (but only for sentimental
reasons), is 2.1 improved in some profound way over 2.1. I don't mind
using a kernel that can be "unstable" I lived with the 1.3 series,
because I needed appletalk support.
As an addition to my previous post, maybe we can make an unstable-2.1
which is the same as unstable, i.e. their are links in to unstable for
all "normal" programs, but programs that require kernerl 2.1 can go in
unstable-2.1, this solves the problem of package naming b/c they can have
the same version numbers but they won't be in the same part of the
archive, so they won't clobber each other.
Shaya
--
Shaya Potter
spotter@itd.nrl.navy.mil
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: