Re: why still using GCC-2.95 and Linux 2.4.x and 2.2.x?

2006-09-11 Thread Tshepang Lekhonkhobe
On 9/11/06, James Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'm still interesting in knowing why people still use GCC-2.95 and the older kernels, 2.2 and 2.4. As for the kernels, it used to be that the older ones were more stable since 2.6 was also a development series, but is it still the

RE: why still using GCC-2.95 and Linux 2.4.x and 2.2.x?

2006-09-11 Thread James Stevenson
On 9/11/06, James Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'm still interesting in knowing why people still use GCC-2.95 and the older kernels, 2.2 and 2.4. As for the kernels, it used to be that the older ones were more stable since 2.6 was also a development series, but is it

Re: why still using GCC-2.95 and Linux 2.4.x and 2.2.x?

2006-09-11 Thread Ron Johnson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/11/06 13:49, James Stevenson wrote: On 9/11/06, James Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, [snip] As far as I know Debian sarge still installs from the net install cd with a 2.4.x kernel. It doesn't seem to have any problems that I have

Re: why still using GCC-2.95 and Linux 2.4.x and 2.2.x?

2006-09-11 Thread T.J. Duchene
Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote: On 9/11/06, James Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'm still interesting in knowing why people still use GCC-2.95 and the older kernels, 2.2 and 2.4. As for the kernels, it used to be that the older ones were more stable since 2.6 was also a development

RE: why still using GCC-2.95 and Linux 2.4.x and 2.2.x?

2006-09-10 Thread James Stevenson
Hi, I'm still interesting in knowing why people still use GCC-2.95 and the older kernels, 2.2 and 2.4. As for the kernels, it used to be that the older ones were more stable since 2.6 was also a development series, but is it still the case. The most interesting issue is the usage of Linux

Re: why still using GCC-2.95 and Linux 2.4.x and 2.2.x?

2006-09-08 Thread Sven Hoexter
On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 07:54:07PM +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote: Hi, I'm still interesting in knowing why people still use GCC-2.95 and the older kernels, 2.2 and 2.4. As for the kernels, it used to be that the older ones were more stable since 2.6 was also a development series, but is

Re: why still using GCC-2.95 and Linux 2.4.x and 2.2.x?

2006-09-08 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 07:54:07PM +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote: Hi, I'm still interesting in knowing why people still use GCC-2.95 and the older kernels, 2.2 and 2.4. As for the kernels, it used to be that the older ones were more stable since 2.6 was also a development series, but

why still using GCC-2.95 and Linux 2.4.x and 2.2.x?

2006-09-07 Thread Tshepang Lekhonkhobe
Hi, I'm still interesting in knowing why people still use GCC-2.95 and the older kernels, 2.2 and 2.4. As for the kernels, it used to be that the older ones were more stable since 2.6 was also a development series, but is it still the case. The most interesting issue is the usage of Linux 2.2.x