Sven Luther wrote: > Obviously, from a kernel maintainer perpespective, the one that makes more > sense is the latest one we are working on, which will always be the more > actively maintained one and as a consequence the one of more interest to the > users, not to mention the fact that for the users to have any benefit, they > need the latest kernel, not really one which is newer than the sarge one, but > still a couple of month old. Many sarge users have problems installing to SATA drives. Any kernel newer than the 2.6.8 in sarge will work better for many of these users. 2.6.12 has been reported to work for users who failed with 2.6.8. While the absolute latest will probably support the most new hardware, it also *doesn't currently boot past the initramfs* on a lot of other hardware. Your cost/benefit analysis should not stop with "whatever's newest". -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature