i still don't see why compiling a kernel on your own is a problem. i
have never used a precompiled kernel, and i never had problems.
On Sun, Mar 12, 2000 at 08:02:40AM -0800, David Bristel wrote:
> I agree, we shouldn't care about "keeping up with the other dists" when
> stability may suffer because of it. At the same time, as you have noticed,
> there are a number of commercial packages out there that may require the newer
> kernel versions, or apps. We do NOT want people to choose Redhat over Debian
> just because they can't run the Linux apps they want to. I'm not saying that I
> care for these commercial apps, but a business that WANTS to run Debian, as well
> as run a commercial app should be able to.
>
> Dave Bristel
>
>
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2000, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
>
> > Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 01:02:42 -0500
> > From: Jacob Kuntz <jpk@cape.com>
> > To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> > Subject: Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
> > Resent-Date: 12 Mar 2000 06:01:56 -0000
> > Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> > Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ;
> >
> > Hamish Moffatt (hamish@debian.org) wrote:
> > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 04:06:01PM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> > > > our biggest handicap is that we're always a year behind everyone else. being
> > > > a year behind is suicide in any industry. being a year behind in an industry
> > >
> > > Have you listened to yourself? Depends on what your aims are; if you want
> > > to be hip, cool, most popular etc then I guess 'new' is a higher
> > > priority than 'stable'. Otherwise, let's stick with the proven 2.2
> > > series.
> > >
> >
> > aarrgghh. you are missing the point.
> >
> > what i'm trying to get across here is that we aren't keeping up with what's
> > going on in the rest of the world. linux and other free software projects
> > are rapidly becoming something very good. in order to facilitate and
> > encourage this, we distribution coordinators need to pull not neccicarily
> > the latest but certianly the greatest free software together in a usefull,
> > functional way.
> >
> > the issue at hand here is not the kernel. the issue is the release practice.
> > i think there should be an initiative to bring out stable releases more
> > often. if we don't, it will be just another excuse to use commercial
> > software. i don't think any of us want that. on the other hand, bringing out
> > any software package prematurly will also discourage use of free software.
> >
> > i was really hoping the we could get past the knee-jerk reactionary comments
> > like "hell no, we won't put in an untested kernel" and get on with "here's
> > how we could make more stable releases".
> >
> > i see no problem at all with waiting for 2.4.10 (or so) before shoving that
> > in the users lap. just so long as we do get it in before it too is obsolete.
> >
> > >
> > > Hamish
> > > --
> > > Hamish Moffatt VK3SB. CCs of replies on mailing lists are welcome.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> > > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> > >
> >
> > --
> > (jacob kuntz) jpk@cape.com jake@{megabite,underworld}.net
> > (megabite systems) "think free speech, not free beer."
> >
> >
> > --
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> >
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Attachment:
pgp2FO7LHvdzn.pgp
Description: PGP signature