Since the official MDK 9.1 update kernel still lacks some features,
I decided to add some of them myself with the following changes:
- Keep version/release to not breake 3:rd party modules / addons...
- My latest vesafb patch that you can find in 2.4.21-rc7-ac1
- nForce2 UDMA/133 reporting (but
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, Thomas Backlund wrote:
(and yes... Danny's latest kernels does AFAIK have all of
these, except for the latest vesafb / nforce2 udma133...)
^^
you sure I do not have the latest? If not I better add them.
Anyway, my plan
Viestissä Torstai 12. Kesäkuuta 2003 19:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] kirjoitti:
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, Thomas Backlund wrote:
(and yes... Danny's latest kernels does AFAIK have all of
these, except for the latest vesafb / nforce2 udma133...)
^^
you sure
On the topic of the update kernel and the kernel that Danny maintains,
also applies to the modified update kernel from Thomas.
Would you guys consider giving your kernels different names, just so
that we don't have to ask confused users Which version of 2.4.21.0.18
are you using? The security
Viestissä Torstai 12. Kesäkuuta 2003 21:59, H. Narfi Stefansson kirjoitti:
On the topic of the update kernel and the kernel that Danny maintains,
also applies to the modified update kernel from Thomas.
Would you guys consider giving your kernels different names, just so
that we don't have to
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, H. Narfi Stefansson wrote:
Would you guys consider giving your kernels different names, just so
that we don't have to ask confused users Which version of 2.4.21.0.18
are you using? The security update one, Thomas' one or Danny's?
Well, kernelteam doesn't tell me if
Viestissä Torstai 12. Kesäkuuta 2003 23:04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] kirjoitti:
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, H. Narfi Stefansson wrote:
Would you guys consider giving your kernels different names, just so
that we don't have to ask confused users Which version of 2.4.21.0.18
are you using? The security
Thomas Backlund wrote:
The reason my _updated_ update kernel kept the version
was to keep it name compatible with the original update kernel
so that 3rd party modules and RPMS wont complain ( nVidia, Ati, ...)
Ah! That's a good reason.
I agree with Danny that hackkernel is a bad, bad name! The
Wich is as I stated earlier:
running Cooker kernel is like living on the edge...
running a hackkernel means you already made the jump ... ;-()
(feel the rush... it's not the fall that kills you... it's the stop
at
the end of the fall...)
...or as those who like to engage in such things say, It
