lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Avoiding SMP
From
Date
Chris Wedgwood <cw@ix.net.nz> writes:

> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 06:41:47 -0600 (CST)
> From: Thomas Molina <tmolina@probe.net>
> To: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
> Subject: Re: Avoiding SMP
> In-Reply-To: <199803100812.VAA10787@caffeine.ix.net.nz>
> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980310063758.5006B-100000@wr5z>
>
> Why is the SMP line uncommented by default anyway? If most people are
> building UP kernels, the default should be UP IMHO.
>
> Because His Holiness uses SMP?
>
>

Probably because 2.1.x is development tree, and we want a stable SMP
before stable tree (2.2.x).

To make it stable, we must test it thoroughly, do we?

And that comment about His Holiness is probably correct too. :)

Reagrds,
--
Posted by Zlatko Calusic E-mail: <Zlatko.Calusic@CARNet.hr>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Took an hour to bury the cat. Silly thing kept moving.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:41    [W:0.068 / U:0.176 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site