Well, it's certainly faster, but still won't run a 32 bit 2.6.20 kernel as a guest on a 64 bit server.
I'll let you know whether the clock works any better, but I'm not holding my breath. Steve On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 22:22:06 +1300 Steve Holdoway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 22:06:11 +1300 > Robert Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Monday 05 March 2007 9:59 pm, Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > > > > > > And I suppose I should ask if it is worth upgrading? > > > > > > Dunno, I've known of the new version for 5 min now. Is there a > > > changelog? Does the old one do what you want? > > > > > I have not yet found a changelog. > > > > And yes I am happy with the current version - it just advised me of the new > > version when I started it tonight. > > I'll try it out... I'm so sick of the clock being wrong, not being able to > run kernels > 2.1.15, etc, etc, etc... this is on a 64 bit host with 4GB > memory. Was better with only 2GB. > > It may be free, but you do wonder if it's worth what you paid for it. > > > Steve
