On Wed, Dec 16, 1998 at 06:03:05PM +0100, Paul Slootman wrote:
> If 2.0.36 goes in, I'd have to at least upload an isdnutils that is
> identical to the current slink one, but which conflicts with kernel
> 2.0.36, as that is simply not compatible. This might be a good idea
> anyway, to prevent problems when people upgrade to a new kernel
> without upgrading the rest... Would this be sufficient reason to
> allow an upgrade (of the current slink version)?
Great idea!!
> Paul Slootman
cu
Torsten
Attachment:
pgpPBVC_n6rry.pgp
Description: PGP signature