[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: dev kernels in stable releases

** Reply to message from Jarod Wilson <jcw wilsonet com> on Sat, 15 Mar 2003 02:10:43 -0800

> > Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 19:41:26 -0500
> > From: Audioslave - 7M3 - Live <creed7m3live columbus rr com>
> > To: phoebe-list redhat com
> > Subject: Re: RTL kernels - Re: Latest UTB Newsletter
> > Reply-To: phoebe-list redhat com
> --snip--
> > About the 2.5 kernel being a lot better with speed and such, I'd like to see
> > it included and integrated within the distribution. I don't see any conflict
> > with releasing an odd numbered distribution with an odd numbered kernel
> > version. The whole backporting features seem to be like trying to satisfy all
> > of the depedecies needed for certain programs to work. If a crucial system
> > factor was not listed in the dependacies, figuring out the needed libs or base
> > programs would be very hard to accomplish.
> --snip--
> Um, fat chance Red Hat would put a development kernel in a stable
> release. I see a whole LOT of conflict there. Stable releases should
> only contain stable kernels. I'll take stability over speed, thank you.
> You DO understand that odd-numbered kernels are DEVELOPMENT kernels,
> while all Red Hat's x.x releases are stable releases, right?

LOLOL. The drivers for my scsi card still haven't been re-written for the new driver model. I think it is just a TEENSY premature to load up 2.5 just yet :))


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]