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

Re: kernel source -- 2.0.29 vs 2.0.30

On Sat, Nov 08, 1997 at 02:15:51PM -0500, Will Lowe wrote:
> Ok,  I applied some patches to my last kernel compile in an attempt to
> make it Cyrix aware,  and it didn't work :)  So now I need to reinstall
> the kernel-src package and recompile myself a new kernel.  
> I've heard rumours of "bad things" about 2.0.30,  and I'm wondering if
> anyone has a recommendation of one verses the other.  I don't need
> anything exotic in the kernel -- just sound,  tcp/ip,  ethernet,  ide,
> all standard stuff.

Try one and see if it works? 2.0.29 should always work.
I run it on my off-site production machine, where I need it to be
stable. But I run 2.0.30 on my home server and it works just fine too,
but hardly any load. Then there's 2.0.31 ..

Hamish Moffatt, StudIEAust              hamish@debian.org, hmoffatt@mail.com
Student, computer science & computer systems engineering.    3rd year, RMIT.
http://hamish.home.ml.org/ (PGP key here)             CPOM: [*****     ] 58%
The opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth.  --Bohr

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: