lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Notebooks
David Lang wrote:
> I disagree, If we stop calling them "unstable" then people will start to
> depend on them and if we have a buggy version it will cause more problems.
> Yes some of them are more stable (we are after all getting ready to roll
> over to 2.2) but the fact remains they are development version, things are
> new, untested and (probably) will break at least on some systems.

Talking about this, I'm trying now to compile the 2.1.115 on an
UltraSparc. Have anyone ever tried it? If yes, did it work well? I'm
getting myself pretty odd compilation errors. I might write a list of
them, if anyone is interested. And would anyone know which 2.1 kernel
version is considered the "most stable" for the Sparc platform?

Cheers,

--
André Gonçalves Zelenkovas
Universo Online - Sao Paulo - Brazil
Phone +55 11 224 4383

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans