Re: I thought 2.2.x should detect RAM >64

To: Phil Brutsche <pbrutsch@creighton.edu>, Arcady Genkin <a.genkin@utoronto.ca>
Cc: Debian-User <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: I thought 2.2.x should detect RAM >64
From: Ethan Benson <erbenson@alaska.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 21:56:47 -0900
Message-id: <v0422082fb4a083ecb490@[192.168.0.1]>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.21.0001110043420.490-100000@fury.brutsche.org>
References: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.21.0001110043420.490-100000@fury.brutsche.org>

On 11/1/2000 Phil Brutsche wrote:

gcc 2.95.2?  It's likely.  The kernel folks don't want to hear bug reports
about kernels built with that.  Try building with egcs 1.1.2 or gcc
2.7.2.3.

that is not true anymore. kernel developers DO want to hear bugsabout 2.95 now that 2.2.14 is mostly 2.95 OK...



--
Ethan Benson
To obtain my PGP key: http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/pgp/

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: I thought 2.2.x should detect RAM >64
  - From: Phil Brutsche <pbrutsch@creighton.edu>

References:
- Re: I thought 2.2.x should detect RAM >64
  - From: Phil Brutsche <pbrutsch@creighton.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: I thought 2.2.x should detect RAM >64
Next by Date: Re: I thought 2.2.x should detect RAM >64
Previous by thread: Re: I thought 2.2.x should detect RAM >64
Next by thread: Re: I thought 2.2.x should detect RAM >64
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread