sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen)
- From: Robin Cook <rcook AT wyrms.net>
- To: Wolfgang Scheicher <worf AT sbox.tu-graz.ac.at>
- Cc: Source Mage - Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen)
- Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:37:19 -0600
I have been running the 2.6.x kernel since the test as it solved some
problems I have with the 2.4 kernels. And I have been running the NPTL
since it was in the glibc spell.
The only issue I have with it is that I have to use the cvs version of
libraw1394 with the 2.6 kernels the last I checked.
CuZnDragon
Robin Cook
On Wed, 2004-02-18 at 11:30, Wolfgang Scheicher wrote:
> As far as i can tell there are less and less problems with 2.6.x kernels.
> I myself switched my work system to 2.6.x when 2.6.2 got released, and with
> my
> new glibc i burned the bridges behind me.
>
> So when shall we use 2.6.x as default for the linux spell and the iso?
>
> We shouldn't do it to early, but propably shouldn't wait too long either.
>
> I for myself belive that things work well enough to switch test grimoire to
> 2.6.x kernels soon (within the next weeks). And stable somewhen later when
> it's save. This doesn't mean that users have to upgrade, it's more about
> what
> shall be default. However, a user should not run into too much troubles
> when
> using the default :-)
>
> So - Which kernels are you running, and which problems did you run into
> because of your kernel?
>
> Worf
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen)
, (continued)
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen),
Paul, 02/18/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen), Jose Bernardo Silva, 02/18/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen), David C. Haley, 02/18/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen),
Eric Sandall, 02/18/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen),
David C. Haley, 02/18/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen),
Arwed von Merkatz, 02/18/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen), David C. Haley, 02/18/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen),
Arwed von Merkatz, 02/18/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen),
David C. Haley, 02/18/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen), Treeve Jelbert, 02/18/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen), Robin Sheat, 02/18/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen), Chris Dombroski, 02/18/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen),
Robin Cook, 02/18/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen), Arwed von Merkatz, 02/18/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] thoughts about default kernel branch (moving to 2.6.x somewhen),
Paul, 02/18/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.