On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 10:42 -0700, canuck15 wrote: > I was wondering what peoples thoughts are about this. It seem that * > works just as well on Linux 2.6 as 2.4. Maybe a few small issues here > and there but generally it seems to me that * is just as stable on > either platform. 2.4 is the obvious choice for the highest > possiblility of a stable well tested environment but 2.6 seems to have > some enticing benefits. > > Can Linux 2.6 be considered a viable choice now a days for someone > looking for a well tested stable production environment even though it > is not as well tested as 2.4 (yet!).
Following that argument to it's logical conclusion I'd stick to 2.0.xx or one of the 2.2 series. -- Dave Cotton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
