On Fri, Oct 12, 2001 at 12:37:01AM -0400, you [T. A.] claimed:
> Well I'd have to agree that for stability I'd also go for 2.2.x. 2.4.x
> isn't bad but 2.2.x is just rock stable right now. Furthermore its been
> hard to gain confidence in 2.4.x with all the bugs that have yet to be
> worked out. I'd use 2.2.x almost exclusively if it would just gain support
> for the latest EIDE chipsets, a journaling filesystem, and the latest SMP
> boards. iptables and large file support would also be great.
Of course, you can get most of the IDE chipset support, fs support (reiserfs
3.5, ext3) and LFS support as patches for 2.2:
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/hedrick/ide-2.2.19/
ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiserfs-for-2.2/linux-2.2.19-reiserfs-3.5.34-patch.bz2
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/sct/ext3/
http://moldybread.net/patch/kernel-2.2/linux-2.2.19-lfs-1.0.diff.gz
-- v --
v@iki.fi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 15 2001 - 21:00:43 EST