On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, voguemaster wrote:
> True, but then how would you explain the article by Moshe ? He tested several > 2.4 kernels and the RH 7.2 kernel, while a bit slower, was stable. different usage patterns. btw, i didn't read the article. thought it does not matter - the fact that it worked for one test can NOT be used to refute the case that it did NOT work for another test. and by telling ariel "you are talking bullshit because it works for us" - you are not making a good case. fact is, that it didn't work. and as far as i know ariel, i don't think he would go saying something did not work without doing some proper testing, and without realy seeing it not testing. on the other hand, i don't think its redhat's fault at all - its the fault of the 2.4 kernel developers, and their decision making. the good thing, is that we can see a path of it stabilizing - but it took quite long to stabilize. now, here is a question for those 'in the know' - how far is alan cox involved in choosing what patches go into redhat's kernel version, since he begun working for them? or, who in redhat decides on that? -- guy "For world domination - press 1, or dial 0, and please hold, for the creator." -- nob o. dy ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
