Thanks Roland,
On Tuesday 26 June 2007 21:03, Roland Kuhn wrote:
> On 26 Jun 2007, at 16:37, Zoltán HUBERT wrote:
> > Whatever "stable" means.
>
> What you mean by "stable" pretty much excludes any
> serious development, without which the Linux kernel woul
Thanks Roland,
On Tuesday 26 June 2007 21:03, Roland Kuhn wrote:
On 26 Jun 2007, at 16:37, Zoltán HUBERT wrote:
Whatever stable means.
What you mean by stable pretty much excludes any
serious development, without which the Linux kernel would
very soon be obsolete. If you want a stable
On Tuesday 26 June 2007 13:59, Helge Hafting wrote:
> Zoltán HUBERT wrote:
> > Well, I'm using SuSE Pro 9.3 (excellent choice by the
> > way), coming with kernel 2.6.10-SuSE
> You either stick with SuSE 9.3 forever, or you
> *try* something newer to see if it works,
I di
On Tuesday 26 June 2007 13:59, Helge Hafting wrote:
Zoltán HUBERT wrote:
Well, I'm using SuSE Pro 9.3 (excellent choice by the
way), coming with kernel 2.6.10-SuSE
You either stick with SuSE 9.3 forever, or you
*try* something newer to see if it works,
I did. It (2.6.15) didn't. Between
On Friday 22 June 2007 00:29, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > You might think it's easy for me to simply "use" Linux
> > and complain while you're doing the hard stuff. As it
> > happens, the current development/stable model makes our
> > life as "users" more and more difficult.
>
> In what way?
Well,
On Friday 22 June 2007 00:52, Stefan Richter wrote:
> Zoltán HUBERT wrote:
> > So I feel that a turning-point is coming where a really
> > really really (x 15) stable and reliable kernel is
> > NEEDED.
>
> Not satisfied with 2.6.16.y or one of the "enterprise&quo
On Friday 22 June 2007 00:08, you wrote:
> > So I feel that a turning-point is coming where a really
> > really really (x 15) stable and reliable kernel is
> > NEEDED.
>
> Its incredibly hard to keep a stable kernel side API/ABI
> by just backporting fixes. Fortunately you can pay
> vendors to do
Hello gentlemen (and ladies ?)
As a power-user (NOT a hacker) I kindly ask you to please
change the naming scheme and come back to the traditional
model, and release a stable kernel while working on a
develoment branch.
I'm not on the [lkml] so should you answer please CC my
e-mail: [EMAIL
Hello gentlemen (and ladies ?)
As a power-user (NOT a hacker) I kindly ask you to please
change the naming scheme and come back to the traditional
model, and release a stable kernel while working on a
develoment branch.
I'm not on the [lkml] so should you answer please CC my
e-mail: [EMAIL
On Friday 22 June 2007 00:08, you wrote:
So I feel that a turning-point is coming where a really
really really (x 15) stable and reliable kernel is
NEEDED.
Its incredibly hard to keep a stable kernel side API/ABI
by just backporting fixes. Fortunately you can pay
vendors to do this for
On Friday 22 June 2007 00:29, Jesper Juhl wrote:
You might think it's easy for me to simply use Linux
and complain while you're doing the hard stuff. As it
happens, the current development/stable model makes our
life as users more and more difficult.
In what way?
Well, I'm using SuSE
On Friday 22 June 2007 00:52, Stefan Richter wrote:
Zoltán HUBERT wrote:
So I feel that a turning-point is coming where a really
really really (x 15) stable and reliable kernel is
NEEDED.
Not satisfied with 2.6.16.y or one of the enterprise
distro kernels?
so why not call this a day
12 matches
Mail list logo
