OT: [Re: Sarge 2.6 kernel i386 install]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Joey Hess wrote on 27.03.2005 05:17:
| No, we're not making the 2.6 kernel default on i386 because there is
| probably insufficient time before the release of sarge to tell if it
| will tend to work as well on all the varied and broken hardware out
| there as the 2.4 kernel does.
I can't help the grin on my face reading this, on one hand because I've
heard that "the release of sarge is imminent" just one time to often to
really believe it, on the other hand because seing that written by
someone with an @debian.org adress makes it sound o' so more convincing.
I for one am keeping my fingers crossed, in contrast to many people out
there sarges' becoming stable to me would 'really' make a difference
apart from having security updates since I have an awfully slow dial-up
connection and just can't afford to upgrade bigger packages like e.g.
kde. And I just don't want to buy an RC Version of the sarge CDs,
especially when I know I'm gonna buy 'the real thing' in the near future
(hopefully) anyway.
Cheerio, Roman.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCRqmPn0kyIx7rF68RAkhWAKCr2CNVd2rnUmxdPwhMcCcA6KFpvQCgscSG
CarGGjXrPInWDuazZ4HErb8=
=SJdy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: