** Reply to message from Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 15 Mar 2003 02:10:43 -0800
> > Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 19:41:26 -0500 > > From: Audioslave - 7M3 - Live <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: RTL kernels - Re: Latest UTB Newsletter > > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --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? <snip> 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 :)) jb -- Phoebe-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/phoebe-list
