[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Kernel 2.0.30 a bad choice for 1.3

"Christoph Lameter" <clameter@waterf.org> writes:

> Herbert has fixed bugs in the past in 2.0.30 and the current debian version
> is already heavily patched. Its not the question of asking him. He already
> did it. The question is if all (dont take all to extremes...) bugs known
> have found some consideration by Herbert.
> I have not had any trouble with 2.0.29. If Herbert has fixed 2.0.30 then
> lets take 2.0.30 but change the version number to
> 2.0.30deb or so to distinguish it from official Kernel releases.

This has good and bad sides to it.  If Herbert has fixed the
networking problems, including IP masq., then it would be workable for
most people to use a thus-patched version.

However, on the downside, it would become more difficult to apply
third-party patches (usu. adding extra features) since the diffs won't
necessarily apply at the same place or work the same way.

If the serious bugs have indeed been fixed, then perhaps such a kernel
would be the right one to use.

John Goerzen          | Running Debian GNU/Linux (www.debian.org)
Custom Programming    | 
jgoerzen@complete.org | 

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: