Only use kernel 2.4 on test systems which you can afford to have go down
if something goes wrong. The current 2.4 versions have the "pre" on their
names explicitly because of their beta nature -- Things might work, but
there's no guarentee.
On a production system which must "just work", 2.2.17 is
Hanno Böttcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I want to install a Debian and I'm asking myself what Kernel whould be
> the best choice? E.g. anyone tried the 2.4 ? Is it making Problems?
I am using 2.4.0-test9 and it seems fine so far. It allows me to use
LVM and ReiserFS, both of which
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 09:26:57AM +0100, Hanno Böttcher wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I want to install a Debian and I'm asking myself what Kernel whould be
> the best choice? E.g. anyone tried the 2.4 ? Is it making Problems?
>
2.2.17 from ftp.kernel.org, its more recent then the debian packages
which
Hi all!
I want to install a Debian and I'm asking myself what Kernel whould be
the best choice? E.g. anyone tried the 2.4 ? Is it making Problems?
Thanx for hints
Hanno
4 matches
Mail list logo
