Re: Why 2.2 kernel instead of 2.4
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 01:45:46PM -0500, Donald R. Spoon wrote:
> Go over to the Developers / Debian-Boot mailing list and look for a
> thread entitled "2.4 kernel as default boot kernel on CD #1 ??" started
> around 4 April 2002, I think. This might answer some of your
> questions... dunno.
I just finished reading the whole thread. It seems to be a
hotly contested issue at this point in time. FWIW, I think it
would be a shame if Debian 3.0 shipped with 2.2 as the default
kernel. Everytime some magazine shows a comparison table, the
fact that Debian 3.0 installs a 2.2 kernel by default is going
to make Debian look out-of-date -- regardless of how trivial it
is to use a non-default 2.4 kernel at install time or how easy
it is to switch to a 2.4 kernel later.
OTOH, I want to ship my product with Debian 3.0 on it, and I
want it to be the "stabe" version when I get to that point...
--
Grant Edwards
grante@visi.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: