On 5/14/05, Holly Bostick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Michael Haan schreef: > > I *think* I know what they are, what risk do I run by using them? > > > > If you think there's a risk, then I don't think you know what they are :-) . > > The "vanilla" sources are the same sources you would get on kernel.org. > No extra patches (as you would find in gentoo-dev-sources) or > optimizations/patches (as you would find in ck-sources) and no "bleeding > edge" patches (as you would find in mm-sources). > > The kernel doesn't get any more risk-free than vanilla-sources, because > if those sources are broken then Linux is broken. > > Holly > -- > [email protected] mailing list > >
I've always used gentoo-dev-sources (now gentoo-sources, correct?) because I was under the impression that they were optimized for my hardware (specifically, amd64). If that's true, then I guess the "risk" I was referring to was the exposure created by not having that. Am I wrong? -- [email protected] mailing list
