On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 01:43:50PM +0200, Ehab Heikal wrote: > I am confused, if it is stable why is the 1.9 branch called development.
probably because 'our' standards are somewhat higher, and we prefer to call it development as long as we are not damn sure that it is rock solid ... (the 2.0 branch will be labeled 'stable') HTH, Herbert > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Arne > Blankerts > Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 2:27 PM > To: vserver@list.linux-vserver.org > Subject: RE: [Vserver] Kernel 2.6.11.5 Problem > > > On Sun, 2005-04-10 at 12:41 +0200, Ehab Heikal wrote: > > how stable is the 2.6 branch of vserver, would you run it in a > > production envoirnment. > > Stable is very relative definition [tm] > I've been using the 2.6 branch on two production servers for quite some > time now with no known problems. Actually, it's more stable then the 2.4 > version ever was for me... > > CYA Arne > _______________________________________________ > Vserver mailing list > Vserver@list.linux-vserver.org > http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver > > _______________________________________________ > Vserver mailing list > Vserver@list.linux-vserver.org > http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver _______________________________________________ Vserver mailing list Vserver@list.linux-vserver.org http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
