On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 12:08:30PM -0500, Jonathan M. Slivko wrote:
> Linux www.voyageri.net 2.4.17-grsec-1.9.3a #4 Tue Jan 22 14:37:55 EST
> 2002 i686 unknown
>
> I've been running that kernel for about 4 months with no problems
> whatsoever. What's not to trust about it?
Just because it works
t Office Box 250167
http://www.voyageri.net ... . .. New York, NY 10025, U.S.A.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Trond Eivind Glomsrød
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 12:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: 2.4.9 the basis of t
Dave Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > From: Dan Stromberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > For Pete's sake, why 2.4.9? Please don't tell me Redhat is trying to
> > avoid the new VM? I'm more than a little tired of the old VM swapping
> > me into a oblivion. I've put off buying a new harddisk t
Dan Stromberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For Pete's sake, why 2.4.9? Please don't tell me Redhat is trying to
> avoid the new VM?
The kernel developers don't trust it.
>
--
Trond Eivind Glomsrød
Red Hat, Inc.
___
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMA
Where are the rawhide rpms for download?
I have only found SRPMS.
-Original Message-
From: Dave Reed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 9:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: 2.4.9 the basis of the new redhat kernel patch?
> From: Dan Stromberg <
One of my main reasons for using RedHat was their approach to QA,
especially on the kernel side. I applaud them for sticking with a working
kernel rather than going through the vm-of-the-week cycle that Linus is
putting the Linux community through.
Jon
On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Dave Reed wrote:
> >
> From: Dan Stromberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> For Pete's sake, why 2.4.9? Please don't tell me Redhat is trying to
> avoid the new VM? I'm more than a little tired of the old VM swapping
> me into a oblivion. I've put off buying a new harddisk to get more
> swapspace, because I figured the new
