also sprach Eduard Bloch <edi@gmx.de> [2003.09.22.1155 +0200]: > > Me too - if we have to have significantly modified kernels, they should > > be labelled as being such. > > They are - look at the last part of the kernel-image-KVERS image. So 2.4.22-686 indicates a 2.5 IPsec backport? > Reality check please. grsec modifies the kernel so heavily that it > will ALWAYS conflict with something when you modify the kernel > a bit more that with trivial bugfixes. The same would happen if it > conflicts with ANY of the 93 kernel-patches in the archive - there > is no reason for rants on -devel. It does not conflict with preempt freeswan xfs debianlogo systrace uml usagi ltt lowlatency kdb lkcd badram vlan adaptec and these are just the ones I've tried. -- Please do not CC me when replying to lists; I read them! .''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org> : :' : proud Debian developer, admin, and user `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
Attachment:
pgphiJlSXxdoB.pgp
Description: PGP signature