Re: 2.1.109 useable on 8mb RAM
david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
20 Jul 1998 17:13:07 -0700
In article <linux.kernel.Pine.LNX.4.00.9807172016280.142-100000@tahallah.demon.co.uk>,
Alex Buell <alex.buell@tahallah.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On Fri, 17 Jul 1998, Alan Cox wrote:
>
>> I'd be most suprised ;)
>>
>> 2.1.113 -> 2.2pre maybe - but we have a lot of bugs left and some are both
>> hard to fix and showstoppers
>
>I'd much rather we released 2.2 with as few bugs as possible for obvious
>reasons (teach Microsoft that it _is_ possible to release a fully working
>operating system - unlike Windows 95 which was released with 4,000 obscure
>bugs!), so keep with the 2.1.x tree until we've got all the problems
>ironed out and all user space programs reworked to work/compile with
>*both* libc5/glibc2.
Why this last? That's a userspace problem, not a kernel problem.
____
david parsons \bi/ bad userland, no biscuit.
\/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html