Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 10:02:52PM -0500, Brian White wrote: > > No. We had enough problems upgrading from 2.0.35 to 2.0.36. This would > > be a major change and have corresponding reprocussions. I'm sure it's > > very stable, but it will have incompatibilities.
> I'm using nothing but packages from slink/sparc and I see no > incompatibilities. Then again the box isn't running X, any of the other > sparc devs out there have any input on which kernel provides the > 'safest' X for sparc? I haven't touched 2.0.x kernels for the last year on the Sparc platform. I don't trust them. Additionally, the 2.0.35 Debian kernel wouldn't even boot on my Sparc20 (haven't tried 2.0.36), but I've only been running Debian on that machine for about a month (I installed by hand with the 2.1.x kernel I was using for UltraPenguin). X works fine on my Sparc20 and Ultra5, but I can't speak for other systems. The Ultra 5 has run a variety of CVS kernels from about 2.1.125 to 2.2.0-pre4, and the 20 has run an even wider range of 2.1.x kernels with UP, but mostly 2.1.12x kernels with Debian. Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED]