On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 10:56:45AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > > Half tongue-in-cheek, half not: Is 2.2 a supported kernel for the > > sarge release? Since the 2.4 series has stabilized, it might be > > time to put thoughts into just telling people that 2.4 is Good And > > Right.
> For a lot of architectures, 2.4 was _the_ kernel. I know it was that > way for all our new architectures, and atleast sparc64 on the old > architectures. I also suspect that a person who won't upgrade to 2.4 also wouldn't want to run sarge when it's released anyway. Who would we ping about this, aj? Tks, Jeff Bailey -- learning from failures is nice in theory... but in practice, it sucks :) - Wolfgang Jaehrling
