2.6.23 kernel

[Res]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Robert P. J. Day wrote:

> On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Res wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Scott Henson wrote:
>>
>>> John Wendel wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> Don't be a wimp!  Seriously, if you've got some spare time and a
>>>> non-critical box, you should build 2.6.23, beat it up, and file
>>>> bug reports. It's the way we non-kernel-developers can
>>>> contribute.
>>>
>>> I have no problem with that, but as for a box I actually care
>>> about and want to get stuff done on, vendor kernels all the way.
>>>
>>
>> I recall, hrmmmmmm RH4 i think it was, maybe earlier, an automatic
>> update rendored my desktop useless, they corrected it within hours,
>> but thats too late for the poor suckers like me that were affected,
>> since then, a valuable lesson learnt was never trust a vendors
>> "update" verbatim, and since then, I've never used a RH kernel, once
>> bitten ok, twice bitten your a damned fool.
>
> ummmmmm ... over-dramatize much?
>

> rday

ummmm when your responsible for what I am, yeah, because I'm paid to not 
have things fuck up, but since we moved all servers to Slackware, we've 
never had a single hiccup, so I aint had to any problems in years.
for fucks sake, RH cant even sort out their own rsync servers, why would I 
try trusting them again, its a complete joke, and the funny thing is, the 
same person resposible for it is probably still in that job


-- 

Cheers
Res

Slackware -V- sloooUbuntoooou
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/93393/