john wendel wrote:
On 12/31/2009 12:14 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Konstantin Svist wrote:
On 12/31/2009 09:10 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
And leaves you with no Fedora patches and the disk performance
regression issues of 2.6.32. Also a tainted kernel which some
developers will ignore if you get a
On 12/31/2009 12:14 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Konstantin Svist wrote:
On 12/31/2009 09:10 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
And leaves you with no Fedora patches and the disk performance
regression issues of 2.6.32. Also a tainted kernel which some
developers will ignore if you get a trace, etc.
I thou
Konstantin Svist wrote:
On 12/31/2009 09:10 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
And leaves you with no Fedora patches and the disk performance
regression issues of 2.6.32. Also a tainted kernel which some
developers will ignore if you get a trace, etc.
I thought it's only tainted if there are non-GPL mod
On 12/31/2009 09:10 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> And leaves you with no Fedora patches and the disk performance
> regression issues of 2.6.32. Also a tainted kernel which some
> developers will ignore if you get a trace, etc.
I thought it's only tainted if there are non-GPL modules compiled in.
For
john wendel wrote:
On 12/30/2009 06:08 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Konstantin Svist wrote:
How come Fedora is still on 2.6.31? Is .32 held back on purpose or are
there issues merging it?
It took less than a week for .31.9 to be pushed through... but I don't
see .32 in updates-testing and it's been
On 12/30/2009 06:08 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> My personal experience with building 2.6.32.recent is that if they
> enhance the video drivers any more we will be running text only. Let
> the developers have the holiday off, and hopefully they will have run
> 2.6.32 on their laptops and be motivated
On 12/30/2009 07:39 PM, john wendel wrote:
> F11 with kernel.org 2.6.32.2 + Nvidia driver working fine here. You
> really should learn to build a kernel from sources, once you get the
> config file done, the rest is easy.
I've done this way: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/CustomKernel
But don'
On 12/30/2009 06:08 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Konstantin Svist wrote:
How come Fedora is still on 2.6.31? Is .32 held back on purpose or are
there issues merging it?
It took less than a week for .31.9 to be pushed through... but I don't
see .32 in updates-testing and it's been almost a whole mont
Konstantin Svist wrote:
How come Fedora is still on 2.6.31? Is .32 held back on purpose or are
there issues merging it?
It took less than a week for .31.9 to be pushed through... but I don't
see .32 in updates-testing and it's been almost a whole month...
My personal experience with building 2.6
On 12/30/2009 08:07 AM, Mike Cloaked wrote:
> Paulo Cavalcanti gmail.com> writes:
>
>>
>>
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-December/msg01138.html--
> Paulo Roma CavalcantiLCG - UFRJ
>>
>
> Ahh - thank you - there is usually a good reason for these things...
>
>
>
>
Paulo Cavalcanti gmail.com> writes:
>
>
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-December/msg01138.html--
Paulo Roma CavalcantiLCG - UFRJ
>
Ahh - thank you - there is usually a good reason for these things...
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe:
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Mike Cloaked wrote:
> Mail Lists sapience.com> writes:
>
> >
> > On 12/29/2009 07:54 PM, Konstantin Svist wrote:
> > > How come Fedora is still on 2.6.31? Is .32 held back on purpose or are
> > > there issues merging it?
> > > It took less than a week for .31.9 to
Mail Lists sapience.com> writes:
>
> On 12/29/2009 07:54 PM, Konstantin Svist wrote:
> > How come Fedora is still on 2.6.31? Is .32 held back on purpose or are
> > there issues merging it?
> > It took less than a week for .31.9 to be pushed through... but I don't
> > see .32 in updates-testing a
On 12/29/2009 07:54 PM, Konstantin Svist wrote:
> How come Fedora is still on 2.6.31? Is .32 held back on purpose or are
> there issues merging it?
> It took less than a week for .31.9 to be pushed through... but I don't
> see .32 in updates-testing and it's been almost a whole month...
>
Its no
14 matches
Mail list logo