On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 08:59:25AM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
It sounds to me as if your new machine has hardware which is supported
under 5.x but not 4.9. That's a very good reason to install 5.2 --
caveats about early adopters notwithstanding, by all accounts 5.2 is
turning out nicely.
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 10:23:57AM -0800, Gary Kline wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 08:59:25AM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
It sounds to me as if your new machine has hardware which is supported
under 5.x but not 4.9. That's a very good reason to install 5.2 --
caveats about early
