Re: Choosing which 2.4 kernel tree to use for OldWorld
On Sun, Aug 19, 2001 at 01:07:20PM -0700, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> > On 14 Aug, this message from Mike Fedyk echoed through cyberspace:
> > > For the machines that I *really* need to humm away, and keep working I'll
> > > use 2.2.
> > >
> > > For 2.4, which tree breaks the least? Hopefully, there is a tree that will
> > > supply a bootable kernel that doesn't break core functionality depending on
> > > the time of day...
> >
>
> On Sun, Aug 19, 2001 at 10:06:18AM +0200, Michel Lanners wrote:
> > I am quite happy with BenH's tree. As long as disk space permits, I keep
> > old trees around, and especially one marked as 'good' ;-). That's the
> > kernel I run for day-to-day use, when not trying out newer kernels.
> >
> > That is at this time probably the best approach to 2.4 kernels: try
> > BenH's kernels for some time, and stick to one that works well for you.
> >
>
> Ok, I'll do that...
>
> I'm currently on the debian-powerpc, LKML and linuxppc-dev mailing lists. Are
> there any others I should monitor to keep up with the latest changes on PPC
> 2.4 kernels?
Doesn't answer your question, but...
I'd appreciate it if people would try the kernel-image-2.4.8-powerpc
packages I've uploaded. There'll be 2.4.9 shortly I expect. I know of
one problem in them (you may discover RTC support not getting modprobed
correctly, and as a result your system time may stay off by a few
hours), which I'll fix soon. Other bug reports welcome.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Reply to: