Re: How stable is 2.1.103?
On Wed, 27 May 1998, Liran Zvibel wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I want to upgrade to the development kernel so I will be able to use CDs
> from NT.
>
> I know that 2.1.101 is considered quite stable, but it is not the last
> one. I think that the last one is 2.1.103, is it stable?
> Should I download it or 2.1.101/102?
>
> TIA,
> Liran Zvibel
Well Liran, I've been using the development kernels since 2.1.88 (which
has been the most stable so far) and I am currently using 2.1.101. This
kernel has been working quite well as of yet and I currently have a 6 day
uptime. I have also spoken with a few people running 2.1.103 who say they
have had no problems either. The only problem I see with going with 103 is
that I have seen quite a few more posts to the linux-kernel mailing list
about problems with 2.1.103 than with 2.1.101. I would highly suggest
subscribing to this mailing list if you are thinking about upgrading to a
development kernel. Keep in mind though, it is a high traffic list. So if
you don't feel like getting a lot of mail, don't subscribe. To sum it all
up, 2.1.101 is a little more stable than 2.1.103 and there shouldn't be
much in the way of noticeable differences between to two, so go with one
of the two, the choice is yours.
To subscribe to the linux-kernel mailing list:
1. Send an e-mail with "subscribe linux-kernel" in the body to
majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
2. You will recieve an e-mail with instructions on how to reply in order
to finish the subscription.
3. Your done!
I hope this helps.
.-
Brian Weiss
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: