Re: kernel 2.2.x or 2.4.x ?

To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: kernel 2.2.x or 2.4.x ?
From: Paul Johnson <baloo@ursine.ca>
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 06:19:31 -0700
Message-id: <[🔎] 20030707131931.GF22454@ursine.dyndns.org>
Mail-followup-to: debian-user@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 5.1.1.6.0.20030706210622.00ada5c0@pop3.uk.worldonline.com>
References: <5.1.1.6.0.20030706201915.00ad3dd0@pop3.uk.worldonline.com> <E19ZEzI-0003N5-00@master.debian.org> <E19ZEzI-0003N5-00@master.debian.org> <5.1.1.6.0.20030706201915.00ad3dd0@pop3.uk.worldonline.com> <[🔎] 5.1.1.6.0.20030706210622.00ada5c0@pop3.uk.worldonline.com>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, Jul 06, 2003 at 09:12:42PM +0100, Shango Oluwa wrote:
> Why, if 2.4.x is more recent & secure, is my Debian 3 (woody) CD
> distribution built with kernel 2.2.20 ?

Cause 2.4 wasn't out long enough to be well tested before Woody came out.

- -- 
 .''`.     Paul Johnson <baloo@ursine.ca>
: :'  :    proud Debian admin and user
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fix a system
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/CXNjJ5vLSqVpK2kRAmb9AJsGLwWC26j5NYsMAlxqFjuKjpPGfQCfQpS/
5iU404Yaj+89TNtwSp2cUMs=
=+ntp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply to:

References:
- kernel 2.2.x or 2.4.x ?
  - From: Shango Oluwa <debw@wenzani.worldonline.co.uk>

Prev by Date: Re: New IDE drive dramatically slow system?
Next by Date: Re: How "unstable" is unstable?
Previous by thread: Re: kernel 2.2.x or 2.4.x ?
Next by thread: Re: kernel 2.2.x or 2.4.x ?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread