Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: 2.6.18 kernel

2006-11-02 Thread Vladimir G. Ivanovic
On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 10:51 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I’ve found vanilla kernels to be much more reliable on my system than > Gentoo kernels (why I don’t know), FYI: I have never had a problem with gentoo kernels. I have had non-standard modules that would not compile, but updating the mo

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: 2.6.18 kernel

2006-11-02 Thread Barry . SCHWARTZ
Christoph Mende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skribis: > On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 00:42 +, Duncan wrote: > > FWIW, I handle my kernel stuff directly, downloading from kernel.org, not > > thru portage. Thus, I care not one whit about Gentoo's kernel > > stabilizing. > > echo "sys-kernel/vanilla-sources ~ar

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: 2.6.18 kernel

2006-11-02 Thread Christoph Mende
On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 00:42 +, Duncan wrote: > FWIW, I handle my kernel stuff directly, downloading from kernel.org, not > thru portage. Thus, I care not one whit about Gentoo's kernel > stabilizing. echo "sys-kernel/vanilla-sources ~arch" >> /etc/portage/package.keywords emerge vanilla-sourc

[gentoo-amd64] Re: 2.6.18 kernel

2006-11-01 Thread Duncan
"Mark Haney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Wed, 01 Nov 2006 12:23:28 -0500: > Is it just me or is the .18 kernel slow in getting unmasked? I don't > recall any other releases taking as long to be marked stable, but then I > haven't been quite as anxious to t