Message below meant for Marcelo! (sorry rest!)
On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 20:09, kernel wrote: > On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 13:41, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > > There need to be some unique features in 2.6.X to force people > > > to upgrade, I guess... > > > > Faster, cleaner, way more elegant, handles intense loads more gracefully, > > handles highmem decently, LSM/SELinux, etc, etc... > > > > Please *think* before saying this. It's not always the case. Firewire > support in 2.6 kernel has been less than stellar, for one example. And > yes, for many, solid 1394 support is a requirement for business. > > (And we've all seen the testing that has shown both sides (2.4, 2.6) > have been faster) > > > IMO everyone should upgrade whenever appropriate. > > > > Not sure....on 13 January 2005 Alan Cox posted "Given that base 2.6 > kernels are shipped by Linus with known unfixed > security holes anyone trying to use them really should be doing some > careful thinking. In truth no 2.6 released kernel is suitable for > anything but beta testing until you add a few patches anyway." > > How do you answer this, when telling folks "everyone should upgrade > whenever appropriate."? > > > Just some random thoughts....from a 2.4 supporter :) > > -fd > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
