Re: Another "testing" vs "unstable" question
On 2004-06-23, Ernie McCracken penned:
> On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 09:35:48 -0600, Monique Y. Mudama
><spam@bounceswoosh.org> wrote:
>
>> > where I work we still have a 7.0 box in place: I chose 7.0 over 7.1
>> > so as to have a 2.2 kernel as standard (required for a sat card).
>>
>> It seems odd to me to choose a release based on the kernel, but okay.
>> It seems *very* odd that you're telling us that RedHat switched major
>> kernel numbers for a minor release.
>
> Odd though it may be, it is true. RedHat 7.1 was the first RH release
> to use the 2.4 kernel. :-)
>
> 7.0: http://www.redhat.com/about/presscenter/2000/press_rhl7.html
> 7.1: http://www.redhat.com/about/presscenter/2001/press_sevenone.html
Oh, I believe it. It just serves to emphasize, in my mind, the idea
that redhat and debian work from two completely different theories.
Minor revision numbers shouldn't contain those kinds of changes!
--
monique
Reply to: