On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 09:05:22AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 10:35:21AM +0200, Thomas 'Mike' Michlmayr wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 21:52:17 -0400, > > Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [...] > > > Because kernel 2.4.x is not stable on sun4cdm yet. You've noted that > > > already :) > > > > actually, 2.4.19 was behaving quite well on my SS20 (even in SMP mode) > > and LX. i'm running the dual-SS20 as my two-headed desktop, and it works > > better with 2.4 than with 2.2 (there were issues with the mouse that the > > kernel-upgrade solved). and the 2.4.20-pre11 image from rob seems to have > > fixed the last outstanding annoyance (problems with swap on SMP kernels). > > as far as i can tell from my desktop and firewall, 2.4.current on sun4cdm > > is no worse than on i386. > > > > could we please start to reevaluate the '2.4 is bad for sun4cdm' mantra > > and actually give 2.4 a chance? > > When you have to answer to a few thousand Linux-sparc users for your > decisions, then you can make that choice. > > Answer me this, is the swapon segfault on boot fixed? If not, then I'll > leave 2.4.x out for sparc32 for now. I don't need 20 emails a day to > this list asking "Is this swapon segfault bad?". >
I suggest you talk with Rob and see what his opinions are. Cheers, /ChJ
